UCC filing rejection due to conflicting terms in writing definition - help needed

That might be it actually. I did use 'restaurant equipment' in the main description but then listed 'kitchen fixtures' in the additional collateral schedule. Could that create the conflict?

Exactly! The system flags when it sees terms that could refer to overlapping but differently categorized collateral. Stick with one consistent terminology throughout the entire filing.

The walk-in coolers are definitely permanently installed. Should I classify them as fixtures then?

If they're permanently attached you'll want to file a fixture filing, which has different requirements. That could be why you're getting conflicting terms - mixing fixture and non-fixture collateral descriptions.

Wait, you can include both fixtures and equipment on the same UCC-1 as long as you indicate which is which properly in the collateral description.

I don't think I included serial numbers but let me double-check. Did you have to refile from scratch or could you amend?

Had to refile completely since it was rejected, not just needing an amendment. But the second time went through without issues once I cleaned up the conflicting language.

Never heard of that before. Does it actually catch the specific 'conflicting terms' issues that cause these rejections?

Yes, it specifically checks for inconsistent terminology within the same document and flags when you're using different terms that could refer to the same collateral. Just upload your PDF and it runs the verification instantly.

That sounds too good to be true honestly. How would software know the nuances of collateral descriptions better than someone who deals with this stuff regularly?

The debtor info should be consistent since I copied it directly from their formation documents. But I'll double-check every instance just to be sure.

Good plan. Also verify that your secured party information is identical everywhere it appears. Even small variations in address formatting can trigger conflicts.

Seriously, why can't they just highlight exactly what conflicts instead of making us guess? It's like they want us to fail.

Right? And meanwhile the clock is ticking on perfection deadlines. So frustrating when you're trying to do everything right.

The rejection notices have gotten slightly better over the years but they're still pretty cryptic. Usually you have to call and ask them to walk through it line by line.

That's a really good point about broad vs specific language creating conflicts. Better to be either completely general or completely specific throughout.

Exactly. Pick one approach and stick with it. Don't mix 'all inventory' with 'specifically the following inventory items' in the same filing.

I only used one date throughout so that shouldn't be the issue, but thanks for mentioning it. Good to know for future filings.

Also watch out for conflicting dollar amounts if you're including loan values or collateral values in multiple places.

I used copy/paste for the debtor name so it should be identical everywhere. But I'll go through with a fine-tooth comb to be absolutely certain.

Smart approach. Even extra spaces or punctuation differences can cause problems with these systems.

Had a filing rejected once because I used 'Inc.' in one place and 'Inc' without the period in another. Such a pain!

At this point I'm willing to try anything to avoid another rejection. How quickly does it process the document check?

It's instant - just upload your PDF and it highlights potential conflicts immediately. Much faster than trying to manually compare every section of a complex filing.

Definitely will update once I get it sorted out. Hopefully one of these suggestions hits the mark and I can get refiled tomorrow.

Following this thread too. These rejection reasons are so vague it helps when someone shares the actual cause.