UCC 9-503 debtor name requirements causing major filing headaches

This is exactly right. I see people get confused about this all the time, but 9-503(a)(1) is pretty clear for registered organizations. The trade name variations are irrelevant for UCC search purposes.

But what if the borrower changes their registered name after filing? Do we need to file a UCC-3 amendment immediately?

Good question - yes, you'd need to file a UCC-3 amendment within four months of the name change to avoid the filing becoming seriously misleading under 9-507(c).

That sounds really helpful - I've been manually cross-referencing documents which is time-consuming and error-prone. Does it check other elements besides just the debtor name?

Yes, it verifies the entire document consistency - debtor names, filing numbers, collateral descriptions. Really thorough automated checking that catches things you might miss.

Interesting tool, though I'm always skeptical of automated solutions for legal documents. Nothing beats careful manual review in my opinion.

For registered organizations like corporations and LLCs, you use the registered name per 9-503(a)(1). For individuals, it's different - you'd use the name on their driver's license under 9-503(a)(4). Trade names are only relevant for unregistered organizations.

Oh no... I need to review all my recent filings. This could be a huge problem for our security interests.

Don't panic yet - depending on your state's search logic, the filings might still be discoverable. But definitely worth reviewing and potentially filing amendments.

I feel you on the complexity, but the rules actually create more certainty once you understand them. Without 9-503, every state could have different name requirements.

I guess that makes sense, but it's still frustrating when you're trying to close a deal quickly and have to research corporate name variations.

That's exactly what I'm worried about. Even if we're technically correct, if searchers can't find the filing, it defeats the purpose.

True, but that's really on the searcher to do a proper search. The law requires using the registered name for good reason - it's the only consistent standard.

This is why I always recommend including common variations in the collateral description or as additional debtor names when possible, even though it's not technically required.

For unregistered organizations, 9-503(a)(2) says you use the name that would be sufficient for a lawsuit against the organization. Usually that's the trade name they're commonly known by.

Thanks, that helps clarify it. The partnership rules seem more flexible than the registered organization requirements.

Good point. We described it as 'all manufacturing equipment located at [address]' - do you think that's sufficient or should we be more specific?

That's probably sufficient under the 'reasonably identifies' standard, but if you have detailed equipment lists, more specificity never hurts.

I always include serial numbers when available, especially for high-value equipment. Makes it crystal clear what's covered.

I tried it after seeing it mentioned here and was impressed with how thorough the document comparison was. Definitely beats manual review for catching small details.

Exactly - it's those small details like middle initials or punctuation that can make a filing seriously misleading.

Most state SOS websites have search functions that let you test different name variations. I'd recommend doing test searches using the variations your borrower commonly uses.

That's a good idea. I'll try searching under both the registered name and their common trade name to see what pulls up.

Some states have more forgiving search logic that finds variations automatically, but you can't count on that. Always safer to use the exact registered name.

Thanks, that's reassuring. I think I was overthinking it because of the high dollar amount involved.

Understandable with that much at stake. The key is following the statutory requirements precisely, which it sounds like you did.

And if you want extra peace of mind, tools like Certana.ai can verify your document consistency after the fact to make sure everything aligns properly.