UCC 1207 California filing rejected - debtor name issues need help

Did you end up having to refile everything? I'm hoping there's a way to fix this without starting from scratch.

In my case we filed a UCC-3 amendment to correct the debtor name, but we also had to verify the original filing was still valid during the correction period.

Already did that - the official record shows the comma. So our original filing without the comma is probably defective?

Unfortunately yes, that could create a perfection gap. You'll want to file the amendment ASAP to minimize any potential priority issues.

This is exactly why I always double-check entity records before any UCC filing. Small mistakes like this can void your entire security interest.

Never heard of that but sounds useful. Does it work with California filings specifically?

Yeah it works with any state. You just upload your charter documents and UCC forms and it automatically flags inconsistencies in debtor names, entity types, all that stuff.

That actually sounds really helpful. I'm always paranoid about these exact name match issues with California.

Should I be worried about the gap between the original filing and the amendment? Our loan agreement requires continuous perfection.

The amendment should relate back to the original filing date if it's truly just correcting a clerical error. But definitely document everything in case you need to prove continuous perfection later.

I'd also recommend getting a priority search after the amendment is accepted, just to make sure there are no intervening liens.

The rejection fees are definitely adding up. Each time they kick it back it's another $20.

Exactly! And then you waste weeks trying to figure out what went wrong. Other states are much more reasonable about minor variations.

Good point. I should verify they don't have multiple names registered that could complicate things further.

Yeah, and if they do business under multiple names, you might need to file against all variations to be completely safe.

That's true but expensive. Most lenders just use the legal entity name from the charter docs and call it good.

How long did that take? I need to get this fixed quickly.

Like 2 minutes to get the verification results. Way faster than going back and forth with the SOS rejections.

That's smart. I usually rely on the client to provide their legal name but clearly that's not always accurate.

Right, clients often don't know the exact legal name on file with the state, especially for punctuation and abbreviations.

Same here. I've learned not to trust client-provided entity names without verification.

Good catch. I'll download a fresh form from their website to be safe.

Yeah, I got burned by that once. Spent days wondering why my filing kept getting rejected until I realized I was using an outdated form.

Will do. Planning to file the UCC-3 amendment tomorrow morning. Fingers crossed it goes through without more issues.

Good luck! California can be tricky but at least they're consistent about their pickiness.

Let us know if you try that Certana verification thing too. Sounds like it could prevent these issues upfront.