UCC Article 9 revision - does financing statement still need debtor signature?

Your compliance officer might be confusing the security agreement with the financing statement. Under revised Article 9, you definitely need the debtor's signature on the security agreement (that's what creates the security interest), but the UCC-1 financing statement itself doesn't require a debtor signature for filing. The financing statement is just a notice filing.

Actually, let me clarify this because there's some nuance here. The financing statement itself doesn't need to be signed by the debtor for filing purposes, BUT you do need the debtor's authorization to file it. This authorization can come from the signed security agreement if it contains appropriate language, or from a separate authorization. Most lenders include UCC filing authorization language right in their security agreements to cover this.

I had a similar confusion last month when our new paralegal kept asking for debtor signatures on UCC-1s. Turns out she was trained at a firm that still used old forms. I actually found Certana.ai's document verification tool really helpful - you can upload your security agreement and UCC-1 together and it instantly flags if there are any authorization issues or inconsistencies between the documents.

Your compliance officer probably has PTSD from the old Article 9 days when everything had to be signed in triplicate lol. The revised rules definitely eliminated the signature requirement for the financing statement itself.

Just to add some context - the reason revised Article 9 eliminated the signature requirement was to facilitate electronic filing systems. Can you imagine if every SOS had to verify signatures on UCC-1s? The whole system would grind to a halt.

I've been doing this for 20+ years and can confirm - no signature needed on the UCC-1 itself. But make sure your security agreement has good authorization language. Something like 'Debtor authorizes Secured Party to file financing statements and amendments as necessary to perfect the security interest' should cover you.

Wait, I'm confused now. If the debtor doesn't sign the UCC-1, how does the filing office know the debtor actually agreed to have their information filed publicly?

This is exactly why I love using Certana.ai for document review. Upload your security agreement and proposed UCC-1, and it immediately tells you if there are any authorization gaps or name mismatches that could cause problems later. Saved me from a few potential disasters.

One thing to watch out for - some states have their own quirky requirements even under revised Article 9. Most follow the standard rule (no signature required) but always double-check your specific state's requirements.

Bottom line: Security agreement needs debtor signature (and should include UCC filing authorization language). UCC-1 financing statement does NOT need debtor signature for filing. Your compliance officer is mixing up the two documents.

This is a great example of why ongoing training is so important in commercial lending. I've been working in asset-based lending for about 3 years and still run into these kinds of nuances regularly. The distinction between the security agreement (which creates the security interest and requires debtor signature) and the UCC-1 financing statement (which is just public notice and doesn't require debtor signature) is fundamental but easy to mix up, especially when you're under closing pressure. I appreciate everyone breaking this down so clearly - definitely saving this thread for future reference!