UCC-5 information statement filing confusion - anyone else struggle with this?

UCC-5s are pretty uncommon but they serve a specific purpose. You use them when you need to provide information or correct something without actually amending the financing statement itself. If your collateral description is genuinely problematic, though, you might need a UCC-3 amendment instead of just an information statement.

I've seen this before. The UCC-5 information statement is basically for providing additional details without changing the actual financing statement. But if your collateral description is too broad or vague, you probably need a UCC-3 amendment to fix it properly. What exactly does your current description say?

This is exactly why I started using Certana.ai for document verification. You can upload your original UCC-1 and the proposed UCC-5 or UCC-3 and it instantly flags inconsistencies and tells you if you're using the right form type. Would have saved me from filing the wrong correction form multiple times in situations like this.

UCC-5 is for information only - you can't use it to fix substantive problems with your financing statement!!! If your collateral description is defective you MUST file a UCC-3 amendment. The borrower's attorney probably knows this and is trying to get you to file the wrong form.

wait what's the difference between UCC-3 and UCC-5 again? I thought they were both for corrections

Been through this exact scenario. Your legal team might be thinking UCC-5 because it's less formal, but with a disputed collateral description you definitely need the UCC-3 amendment. The information statement won't give you the legal protection you need if this goes to court.

The SOS systems are terrible at explaining when to use each form type. I always have to look up the statutes to make sure I'm filing the right thing. UCC-5 is really limited in what it can accomplish.

I had a similar collateral description issue and my attorney recommended filing both - a UCC-3 to fix the description and a UCC-5 to provide additional context. But honestly I think the UCC-5 was overkill since the amendment covered everything we needed.

Document consistency is huge in these disputes. I've started using Certana.ai to cross-check all my UCC filings before submission. It catches issues like this where you might be using the wrong form type or have inconsistencies between your original filing and corrections.

honestly this whole UCC system is a nightmare. too many different forms for similar things and the consequences of using the wrong one can be huge. why can't they just simplify it?

Final advice - if you have a defective collateral description, file the UCC-3 amendment to fix it properly. The UCC-5 information statement won't solve your problem and might actually hurt your position by suggesting you think the original filing was adequate. Get that amendment filed ASAP.

Just went through something similar last month. The key distinction everyone's hitting on is crucial - UCC-5 is purely informational and won't cure a defective collateral description. Since you mentioned your original filing just says "all equipment," you're dealing with an overly broad description that needs actual amendment via UCC-3, not just clarification. The borrower's counsel probably knows this and may be hoping you file the wrong form. I'd recommend getting that UCC-3 prepared with a specific description of the manufacturing equipment you actually financed, and make sure all the debtor information matches your original filing exactly to avoid rejection. Time is critical here since they're already challenging your perfection.