UCC Filing Issues After Moving Equipment from Australia - Need Help with International Collateral
We've run into a complicated situation with our UCC-1 filing and hoping someone here has dealt with international equipment transfers before. Our company financed heavy machinery that was originally located in Australia, but we've since moved it to our US operations. The bank is now questioning whether our original UCC filing properly covers this equipment given its international history. They're asking about additional documentation and whether we need to refile or amend our UCC-1. The equipment serial numbers are all there, but there's confusion about the original purchase location affecting the collateral description. Has anyone dealt with cross-border equipment moves and UCC filings? The loan officer mentioned something about needing clearer documentation trails, but I'm not sure if this is a UCC-3 amendment situation or if we need to start over entirely. This equipment represents about 60% of our collateral base, so getting this right is critical for our credit facility.
28 comments
Join the conversation
Maria Gonzalez
International equipment moves can definitely complicate UCC filings, but the good news is that location of the collateral at time of purchase typically doesn't invalidate your UCC-1 as long as the debtor information and equipment descriptions are accurate. The key question is whether your collateral description in the original filing is specific enough to cover the equipment regardless of where it was initially located. What does your current UCC-1 say for the collateral description?
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•The collateral description lists the equipment by make, model, and serial numbers, but it also includes language about 'equipment located at [our US facility address]' which obviously wasn't true when we first filed since the equipment was still in Australia at that time.
0 coins
Maria Gonzalez
•That location-specific language could be problematic. Since the equipment wasn't actually at that location when you filed, you might need a UCC-3 amendment to correct the collateral description to remove the location restriction or update it to reflect the current situation.
0 coins
Natalie Chen
I dealt with something similar last year with imported manufacturing equipment. The bank made us file a UCC-3 amendment to clarify the collateral description and remove location-specific language. We also had to provide import documentation and bills of lading to establish the chain of custody. Your lender is probably just being cautious about perfection issues - better to clean it up now than have problems later if they need to enforce.
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•Did you have any issues with the timing of the amendment? Our original UCC-1 was filed about 8 months ago, and the equipment arrived in the US about 6 months ago.
0 coins
Natalie Chen
•Timing shouldn't be an issue for a UCC-3 amendment as long as your original filing hasn't lapsed. The amendment will relate back to your original filing date for priority purposes. Just make sure you file it promptly once you decide on the correct approach.
0 coins
Santiago Martinez
•Actually had a similar headache with Australian equipment last year. The paperwork trail was a nightmare, but we got through it. I ended up using Certana.ai's document verification tool to make sure all our UCC documents were consistent before filing the amendment. It caught a serial number discrepancy between our UCC-1 and the import docs that could have caused major problems later.
0 coins
Samantha Johnson
This is exactly why I hate dealing with international transactions! The UCC system wasn't really designed for this kind of complexity. You're probably looking at a UCC-3 amendment at minimum, but I'd also check with your state's SOS office about their specific requirements for collateral that crosses borders. Some states are pickier about this stuff than others.
0 coins
Nick Kravitz
•Which state are you filing in? That definitely makes a difference in how strict they are about collateral descriptions.
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•We're in Texas. The original filing went through without any issues, but now that the bank is doing their annual review, they're raising these questions.
0 coins
Hannah White
Texas SOS is generally pretty reasonable about UCC filings, but they do want accuracy in collateral descriptions. Since your equipment is now physically in the US and at your facility, I'd recommend filing a UCC-3 amendment to update the collateral description to reflect the current status. Remove any location-specific language that's no longer accurate and make sure the serial numbers and equipment descriptions are bulletproof.
0 coins
Michael Green
•Agree on the amendment approach. But make sure you keep all the import documentation as backup. If there's ever a dispute about the collateral, you'll want to prove the chain of custody from Australia to your current location.
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•Good point about the documentation. We have all the shipping and customs paperwork, but it's scattered across different files. Should we attach any of this to the UCC-3 or just keep it in our records?
0 coins
Hannah White
•Keep it in your records but don't attach to the UCC-3. The UCC filing itself should be clean and focused. The supporting docs are for your internal records and to provide to the lender if they ask for additional verification.
0 coins
Mateo Silva
Have you considered whether you need to terminate the original UCC-1 and file a completely new one instead of amending? If the collateral description is substantially wrong, an amendment might not be sufficient to perfect the lender's security interest properly.
0 coins
Maria Gonzalez
•That's a valid concern, but terminating and refiling would lose the original priority date. If there are other creditors involved, that could be a bigger problem than the collateral description issue.
0 coins
Mateo Silva
•True, but if the original filing was defective due to the location issue, they might not have proper perfection anyway. Better to have a valid filing with a later date than an invalid filing with an earlier date.
0 coins
Victoria Jones
•I've seen this debate before and honestly, the safest approach is usually the amendment unless the original filing is completely wrong. The courts generally favor preserving priority when possible.
0 coins
Cameron Black
Whatever you decide, double-check everything before filing. I learned the hard way that UCC-3 amendments can create their own problems if you're not careful about the wording. Actually started using Certana.ai to cross-check my UCC documents after a filing got rejected due to inconsistencies I didn't catch. Their tool compares all your documents automatically and flags potential issues.
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•That sounds useful. How does it work with international documentation? Do they handle import docs and shipping records?
0 coins
Cameron Black
•It's mainly focused on the UCC documents themselves - comparing your UCC-1 to UCC-3 amendments to make sure everything aligns properly. But it's great for catching serial number mismatches and description inconsistencies that could cause problems. You just upload the PDFs and it does the comparison automatically.
0 coins
Jessica Nguyen
Been following this thread because we're dealing with similar international equipment issues. The consensus seems to be UCC-3 amendment rather than termination and refiling. Makes sense to preserve the priority date if possible. Thanks for posting this - very helpful discussion!
0 coins
Isaiah Thompson
•Same here. International equipment moves are becoming more common in our industry and the UCC implications aren't always obvious upfront.
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•Glad this is helpful for others. I'll post an update once we get the amendment filed and see how the bank responds.
0 coins
Ruby Garcia
One more thing to consider - make sure your amendment clearly establishes when the equipment arrived in the US and became subject to the UCC filing. This timeline could be important if there are any priority disputes later. The amendment should tell a clear story about the collateral's journey from Australia to your facility.
0 coins
Elijah Brown
•That's a great point. Should we include specific dates in the UCC-3 or just update the description to reflect current status?
0 coins
Ruby Garcia
•I'd keep the UCC-3 focused on correcting the collateral description rather than adding timeline details. But make sure your internal documentation clearly establishes those dates for future reference.
0 coins
Alexander Evans
•Definitely keep a paper trail but keep the UCC filing itself clean and straightforward. Too much detail in the public filing can sometimes create more problems than it solves.
0 coins