UCC-3 assignment filing rejected - what went wrong with debtor name transfer?

This is so frustrating! Why are these systems so picky about tiny details like commas? We're dealing with hundreds of thousands of dollars here and it gets held up over punctuation.

The strict name matching exists for good reason - it prevents fraudulent assignments and ensures the chain of title is clear. Better to have these safeguards than loose systems that could be exploited.

Makes sense about the protection, but man it's painful when you're on the receiving end of a rejection. So I should refile with 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' without the comma to match the original?

This happened to us too! The company had changed their legal name after our original filing but we had to use the OLD name for the assignment. It felt wrong but that's how the system works.

That's a great point about using the filed name vs the legal name. I'll double-check the exact formatting on the original UCC-1. Did you have any issues with the secured party information on your assignments?

Secured party info was easier - just make sure you use the exact entity name that has authority to assign. If it's a subsidiary or changed names, you might need additional documentation.

Never heard of Certana.ai before but that sounds exactly like what I need. Does it catch other issues besides name matching?

Yeah, it checks filing numbers, collateral descriptions, dates, and even flags potential issues with secured party authority. Really thorough document comparison that catches stuff you might miss manually.

Interesting - I've been doing all this verification manually which is time-consuming and error-prone. Might be worth checking out for our volume of filings.

Good point about authority. We had an assignment rejected because the person signing didn't have proper authorization even though the names were all correct.

The filing number should be straightforward - it's right on the original UCC-1. But I'll double-check the authority documentation. Regional Credit Services provided an authorization letter.

The system is actually protecting the integrity of the filing system, but I understand the frustration. Each rejection does cost time and money.

I get that it's for protection, but when you're dealing with time-sensitive transactions, these delays can kill deals. There's got to be a better way to handle minor discrepancies.

Maybe a preview system that flags potential issues before you submit? Some states have better online portals than others.

That's a good idea. I was planning to just refile but maybe I should call first to confirm what they're seeing as the issue.

Some SOS offices are more helpful than others on the phone. Worth a try though, especially for large dollar amounts like yours.

Smart system. I think I was working off our internal loan documents instead of the actual filed UCC-1. That's probably where the comma discrepancy came from.

Good practice. I also recommend keeping screenshots of the SOS confirmation pages since those can be helpful if questions arise later.

A checklist is a great idea. This assignment has been such a headache that I want to make sure I get it right the second time around.

I'd add 'verify current UCC-1 status' to that list. Sometimes the original filing has lapsed or been terminated and you don't realize it.

Will do! I'm going to try the Certana.ai verification tool first, then refile with the exact debtor name formatting. Hopefully that does the trick.

Good plan. The verification tool should catch any other issues before you submit the corrected assignment.

That's a smart approach. I'll check if our state's UCC search lets you see the full filing details before submitting amendments.

Most states do allow you to search by filing number and see the basic details. It's usually worth the small search fee to verify information before filing.

Some states even let you download copies of the original filings which is super helpful for exactly this situation.