UCC 9-606 notification requirements - did I mess up my debtor notice timing?
I'm dealing with a UCC 9-606 situation and honestly not sure if I followed the notification requirements correctly. We had to dispose of some equipment collateral after default, and I sent the debtor notice about the sale 12 days before the auction. Now I'm second-guessing whether that was sufficient notice under 9-606. The debtor is claiming they didn't get proper notice and threatening to challenge the whole disposition. The equipment sold for less than the loan balance so there's a deficiency, but if I screwed up the 9-606 notice timing, does that invalidate our right to collect the deficiency? This is keeping me up at night because it's a $180K shortfall and my boss is asking daily about collection prospects. Has anyone dealt with 9-606 notice challenges before? What's the minimum notice period that actually holds up in court?
33 comments
Join the conversation
Freya Pedersen
UCC 9-606 requires reasonable notification, but the timing depends on your state and the type of sale. 12 days might be cutting it close for some jurisdictions. What state are you in? Also, did you send certified mail or just regular mail? The method of delivery can be just as important as timing.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•We're in Ohio and I sent it certified mail, return receipt requested. Got the green card back signed by someone at the debtor's business address. But now they're saying the person who signed wasn't authorized to receive legal notices.
0 coins
Freya Pedersen
•Ohio follows the standard UCC 9-611 requirements which call for reasonable notification. 12 days for a public sale is usually sufficient, but the bigger issue might be whether proper notice content was included. Did you specify the date, time, and location of the sale?
0 coins
Omar Fawaz
I've seen this exact scenario blow up in court. The debtor's claiming improper notice is a common stall tactic, but if your 9-606 notice was deficient, it can absolutely impact deficiency collection rights. The key is whether you included all required elements: description of collateral, method of disposition, debtor's right to accounting, etc.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•I think I included everything but now I'm paranoid. The notice mentioned the equipment description, sale date and location, and stated they could request an accounting. Should I have mentioned their right to redeem the collateral before sale?
0 coins
Omar Fawaz
•Redemption rights should definitely be mentioned in 9-606 notices. That's a common oversight that can create problems later. You might want to review your notice against the UCC 9-614 requirements for notice content.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
Had a similar mess last year with equipment disposition. Spent weeks going back and forth with attorneys over whether our notice was compliant. Finally used Certana.ai's document verification tool to upload our UCC-1 and the disposition notice - it flagged several consistency issues between the original filing and our notice description. Turned out our collateral description in the notice was too vague compared to what we had on file.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•That's interesting - I hadn't thought about consistency between the original UCC-1 and the disposition notice. How did you fix the discrepancies?
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•We had to send a corrected notice with the proper collateral description that matched our UCC-1 filing. It delayed the sale by another 15 days but saved us from a potential challenge. The Certana tool made it obvious what needed to be fixed.
0 coins
Diego Vargas
•This is exactly why I always cross-check documents before any major collection action. Small inconsistencies in collateral descriptions can torpedo an entire disposition process.
0 coins
Anastasia Fedorov
Your timing sounds reasonable for Ohio, but the bigger red flag is the debtor claiming the signer wasn't authorized. That could be a legitimate challenge to service of notice. Do you have any documentation showing that person was authorized to receive mail for the company?
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•No documentation of authorization. It was just delivered to their business address and someone signed for it. The signature is illegible so I can't even tell who it was.
0 coins
Anastasia Fedorov
•That's potentially problematic. Some courts require proof that the recipient was authorized to accept legal notices for the entity. You might want to check if there are any corporate records showing that person's authority.
0 coins
StarStrider
12 days notice is usually fine unless your state has specific requirements. But honestly, debtors always complain about notice after a sale doesn't go their way. The real question is whether you can prove reasonable commercial notice under 9-606. What kind of sale was it - public auction or private?
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•It was a public auction. We advertised in the local paper for 3 days and sent the debtor notice 12 days in advance. Seemed reasonable at the time.
0 coins
StarStrider
•Public auction with newspaper ads and 12 days notice sounds commercially reasonable to me. The debtor is probably just fishing for ways to avoid the deficiency.
0 coins
Sean Doyle
•Agreed. 12 days plus newspaper advertising should satisfy most reasonable notification standards. The authorization issue might be their only real angle.
0 coins
Zara Rashid
This is why I'm terrified of disposition sales. Too many ways to mess up the notice requirements and then you're stuck with an uncollectible deficiency. Have you considered just writing off the loss rather than fighting over notice technicalities?
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•With $180K at stake, writing it off isn't really an option. My company would probably fire me if I didn't pursue collection just because of notice concerns.
0 coins
Luca Romano
•Don't panic over notice challenges. Most of them are baseless. If you followed reasonable commercial practices, you should be fine. Document everything about your notice process and sale procedures.
0 coins
Nia Jackson
The UCC 9-606 requirements are pretty straightforward - you need to give reasonable notification before disposition. 12 days for a public sale is typically adequate. The debtor's complaint about authorization might be more serious though. Did you research who could accept service for their business?
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•I didn't research authorization specifically. I just sent it to their main business address assuming someone there could accept it. Maybe that was naive.
0 coins
Nia Jackson
•For corporate debtors, it's always safer to send notice to registered agents or known officers. Sending to a general business address can create service issues later.
0 coins
Mateo Hernandez
I ran into something similar and ended up using a document verification service to check if my notice matched all the UCC filing details. Found out my collateral description was inconsistent with the original UCC-1. That kind of mismatch can give debtors ammunition to challenge the whole process.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•Which service did you use? I'm starting to think I should double-check everything before the debtor's attorney finds problems.
0 coins
Mateo Hernandez
•I used Certana.ai - you just upload your UCC-1 and disposition notice PDFs and it flags any inconsistencies. Really simple to use and caught things I never would have noticed manually.
0 coins
CosmicCruiser
Honestly, 12 days notice plus newspaper advertising sounds like you exceeded minimum requirements. The debtor is probably just trying to delay collection. Don't let them intimidate you over technical notice issues if you followed reasonable commercial practices.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•Thanks for the reassurance. I keep second-guessing myself but we did try to follow proper procedures. Just worried about the authorization issue with the person who signed for the certified mail.
0 coins
Aisha Khan
•Even if there's an authorization issue, you can probably cure it by re-serving proper notice. It might delay collection but shouldn't kill your deficiency rights entirely.
0 coins
Ethan Taylor
The 9-606 notice timing sounds fine, but I'd be more concerned about the content of your notice. Did you include the specific UCC 9-614 required elements? Missing required content can be more problematic than timing issues.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•I tried to include everything but I'm realizing I should probably have an attorney review the notice content before proceeding with deficiency collection.
0 coins
Ethan Taylor
•That's probably wise given the amount at stake. An attorney can review both the notice compliance and the service issues to determine your collection prospects.
0 coins
Yuki Ito
•Definitely get legal review for a $180K deficiency. The cost of attorney review is minimal compared to losing collection rights over a notice technicality.
0 coins