UCC 9-515 Lapse Prevention - Missing Continuation Deadlines
Got burned by a UCC 9-515 lapse situation last month and wondering if anyone else has dealt with this nightmare. We had a $750K equipment loan secured by manufacturing equipment, and somehow our UCC-1 filing expired without us catching it in time. The original filing was from 2019, so the 5-year mark hit us in September 2024. What makes this worse is that we thought we had filed a UCC-3 continuation statement, but when we checked the SOS records, there's no record of it. Our borrower's competitor filed a UCC-1 on the same equipment just weeks after our lapse, and now we're dealing with a priority dispute. Under UCC 9-515, once that filing lapses, we lose perfection as if we never filed at all. The equipment is worth about $900K, so this isn't just a paperwork problem. Has anyone successfully challenged a lapse situation or dealt with similar timing issues? Our legal team is exploring options but I'm curious if others have been through this mess.
34 comments
Join the conversation
Diez Ellis
Ouch, that's exactly the kind of situation that keeps me up at night. UCC 9-515 is brutal - no grace period, no mercy. When that 5-year clock runs out, you're done. The good news is that if you can prove your continuation was actually filed but not properly recorded, you might have a case. Did you keep copies of your filing confirmation or receipt numbers?
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•We have email confirmations but the SOS portal shows no record. Our paralegal swears she filed it but can't find the confirmation number. This is exactly why I'm paranoid about deadlines now.
0 coins
Vanessa Figueroa
•Portal errors happen more than people think. I've seen cases where filings get lost in the system. You need to contact the SOS filing division directly with your confirmation details.
0 coins
Abby Marshall
This is why I use Certana.ai's document checker now. You can upload your original UCC-1 and any continuation statements to verify they're all consistent and properly linked. It would have caught this timing issue before it became a problem. The system cross-references filing numbers and debtor names to make sure everything aligns correctly.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•Never heard of that tool but it sounds like exactly what we needed. Does it track continuation deadlines too?
0 coins
Abby Marshall
•It focuses on document consistency verification, but catching name mismatches and filing number errors early prevents a lot of these downstream problems. Worth checking out for your next deals.
0 coins
Sadie Benitez
•I've been using Certana for about 6 months now. Game changer for catching filing errors before they become disasters like this.
0 coins
Drew Hathaway
The competitor filing right after your lapse is suspicious timing. Did they know about your lapse somehow? Under 9-515, they'd get priority, but if there was any improper coordination, that could change things.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•That's what our attorney is investigating. The timing seems too convenient to be coincidental. They filed their UCC-1 exactly 18 days after our lapse.
0 coins
Laila Prince
•18 days? That's either incredible luck or they were monitoring your filing status. Most people don't just randomly check for lapsed UCCs on equipment they want to finance.
0 coins
Isabel Vega
Been there with a smaller deal ($200K construction equipment). Lost perfection due to a lapse and had to negotiate a subordination agreement with the new lender. Cost us about $15K in legal fees and a lower recovery rate. UCC 9-515 doesn't care about your reasons - the clock is the clock.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•How did you handle the subordination negotiation? Our competitor isn't being cooperative.
0 coins
Isabel Vega
•We had to prove the equipment value exceeded both loan amounts and offer them a partial payoff. Not ideal but better than losing everything.
0 coins
Dominique Adams
•Subordination is tricky when the other party knows they have priority. They hold all the cards.
0 coins
Marilyn Dixon
Quick question - did you verify the debtor name on your original UCC-1 matches exactly with current corporate records? Sometimes what looks like a lapse is actually a name mismatch that makes the filing ineffective from day one.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•Good point. The debtor did have a name change in 2022 but we filed a UCC-3 amendment for that. At least I think we did...
0 coins
Louisa Ramirez
•Oh no, if you're not sure about the name amendment, that could be another problem. You need to check the SOS records for that filing too.
0 coins
TommyKapitz
•This is getting complicated. Name changes require proper amendments within 4 months or the filing becomes seriously misleading under 9-506.
0 coins
Angel Campbell
I hate to pile on, but you might want to check if your original UCC-1 had any other defects. Sometimes what looks like a lapse situation reveals other problems that were there all along. Collateral description issues, wrong filing office, etc.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•Now I'm really paranoid. We described the collateral as 'manufacturing equipment' - is that too vague?
0 coins
Payton Black
•Manufacturing equipment is usually fine for UCC-1 filings. The description just needs to reasonably identify the collateral, not be super specific.
0 coins
Harold Oh
For future reference, I set calendar reminders 6 months before continuation deadlines and again at 3 months. UCC 9-515 gives you that 6-month window before the 5-year mark, but waiting until month 60 is asking for trouble.
0 coins
Amun-Ra Azra
•Same here. I file continuations in month 54 just to be safe. Gives me time to fix any filing errors before the deadline.
0 coins
Summer Green
•Smart approach. I also keep a spreadsheet with all our UCC filings and their continuation deadlines. Saved me multiple times.
0 coins
Gael Robinson
This whole situation could have been avoided with better document management. I started using Certana.ai after a similar close call - it cross-checks all your UCC documents to make sure they're consistent. Upload your UCC-1 and any amendments or continuations, and it flags any discrepancies immediately.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•I'm definitely looking into better verification tools after this disaster. Can't afford another mistake like this.
0 coins
Edward McBride
•Document verification is critical. Too many moving parts in UCC filings to track everything manually.
0 coins
Darcy Moore
Update us on how the legal challenge goes. I'm dealing with a potential lapse situation myself and curious how these disputes typically resolve.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•Will do. Meeting with our attorney next week to review all the filing records and see if we have any viable arguments.
0 coins
Dana Doyle
•Hope you find something. UCC 9-515 cases are tough but not impossible if you can prove filing office errors.
0 coins
Liam Duke
The harsh reality is that UCC 9-515 exists for a reason - to clear old filings and prevent perpetual liens. The system assumes lenders will track their own deadlines. Courts generally don't have much sympathy for missed continuations unless there's clear filing office error.
0 coins
Noland Curtis
•I understand the policy reasons, but $750K in exposure because of a filing system glitch seems harsh.
0 coins
Manny Lark
•The filing system isn't perfect, but the burden is on us to verify our filings. That's just the reality of secured transactions.
0 coins
Rita Jacobs
•Agreed. The UCC puts the risk on the secured party to maintain perfection. It's not the state's job to remind us about deadlines.
0 coins