UCC filings search showing wrong debtor names - how to fix database errors?
Running into a major headache with our UCC filings search results. We've been doing due diligence on a potential acquisition and the search results are showing completely different debtor names than what's on our actual UCC-1 forms. Filed three continuations last month and now when I search the database, two of them show up under variations of the company name that don't match our original filings. One shows 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' instead of 'ABC Manufacturing, LLC' (missing comma) and another shows 'XYZ Corp' instead of 'XYZ Corporation'. This is creating problems with our lender who's questioning whether our liens are properly perfected. Has anyone dealt with search discrepancies like this? The SOS office says the filings are 'substantially similar' but our loan documents require exact name matches. Starting to wonder if there's a systematic problem with how the database indexes filings vs how they're actually submitted.
32 comments
Join the conversation
Callum Savage
This is unfortunately super common with UCC search systems. The indexing algorithms often strip punctuation or standardize entity designations differently than what you filed. I've seen this exact issue with LLC vs LLC (no periods) and Corp vs Corporation. The key is understanding that most states use 'debtor name variants' in their search logic, but lenders often want exact matches for their internal compliance.
0 coins
Ally Tailer
•Wait, so if I filed under 'Smith & Associates, Inc.' but it shows up in searches as 'Smith and Associates Inc' that's normal? I've been freaking out about this for weeks thinking our filing was defective.
0 coins
Callum Savage
•Exactly - that's the system working as intended. The UCC search logic is designed to catch these variations to prevent searchers from missing filings due to minor punctuation differences. Your filing is still valid and perfected.
0 coins
Aliyah Debovski
Been dealing with this nightmare for years in commercial lending. The real problem is when you have borrowers with multiple entities that have similar names and the search results become a mess. I've started using a document verification tool that cross-references the actual filed documents against search results - found it called Certana.ai that lets you upload your UCC documents and it automatically flags discrepancies between what you filed and what shows up in searches.
0 coins
Miranda Singer
•That sounds useful - does it actually compare the filed documents to the search database results? We're spending hours manually cross-checking this stuff.
0 coins
Aliyah Debovski
•Yeah, you just upload your UCC-1 and any amendments/continuations as PDFs and it verifies everything matches up properly. Catches name variations, filing number inconsistencies, all that stuff. Way faster than doing it manually.
0 coins
Cass Green
•How accurate is something like that though? I'm skeptical of automated tools for something this critical to lien perfection.
0 coins
Finley Garrett
OMG yes this is driving me crazy too!! Filed a UCC-3 termination last week and it's not showing up in searches AT ALL even though I got a confirmation number. Called the SOS office and they said it takes 2-3 business days to appear in the public database but it's been a week now. Starting to think their system is just broken.
0 coins
Callum Savage
•Terminations can be tricky in search results because some systems remove the original filing from active searches once it's terminated. Check if your state has a 'terminated filings' search option.
0 coins
Finley Garrett
•Oh wow I didn't even know that was a thing. Let me check... yep there's a separate search for terminated records and there it is! Thanks for saving me from a total panic attack.
0 coins
Madison Tipne
This is exactly why I always do multiple search variations when I'm doing UCC due diligence. Search the exact name, search without punctuation, search with different entity designations, search using just the root name without the entity type. It's a pain but covers most of the database quirks.
0 coins
Holly Lascelles
•That's smart but so time consuming. Do you have a standard checklist of variations you always test?
0 coins
Madison Tipne
•I do actually - I search: 1) Exact name as shown on articles, 2) Name without commas/periods, 3) Name with & vs 'and', 4) Name with different entity designation (LLC vs L.L.C.), 5) Just the root business name without entity type. Catches probably 95% of issues.
0 coins
Malia Ponder
The worst part is trying to explain to clients why their 'perfectly filed' UCC isn't showing up in searches the way they expect. Had a client last month convinced their competitor had filed a fraudulent UCC because the search results showed a slightly different name format. Took forever to explain that it was the same filing, just displayed differently by the search system.
0 coins
Kyle Wallace
•Client education is so important with this stuff. I always show them the actual filed document vs the search result and explain the difference.
0 coins
Malia Ponder
•Good approach. I've started including a disclaimer in my search reports explaining that database display may vary from actual filed documents.
0 coins
Ryder Ross
Anyone know if there's a way to request corrections to the search database when the variations are too extreme? We have a client where the database is showing their name as just the first word of their actual company name - like 'Alpha' instead of 'Alpha Beta Gamma Enterprises LLC'. That seems like more than just a formatting variation.
0 coins
Callum Savage
•That sounds like a data entry error rather than a systematic formatting issue. Most SOS offices have a process for reporting database errors, but it can take weeks to get corrected.
0 coins
Gianni Serpent
•I had this happen once - turned out there was a character limit in the old database system that was truncating long company names. Got it fixed but it took two months and multiple phone calls.
0 coins
Henry Delgado
Here's what I don't understand - if the UCC system is supposed to provide notice to potential creditors, how is it serving that purpose when search results don't match the actual debtor names? Seems like a fundamental flaw in the whole system.
0 coins
Olivia Kay
•The theory is that the search logic is designed to be over-inclusive rather than under-inclusive. Better to get too many results than miss a filing because of a punctuation difference.
0 coins
Henry Delgado
•I guess that makes sense from a policy perspective, but it creates a lot of practical problems for lenders trying to verify perfection.
0 coins
Joshua Hellan
What I've learned is to always keep copies of the actual filed documents AND the search results from the same day. That way if there's ever a question about perfection, you can show exactly what was filed vs what the database was displaying at the time. CYA documentation is key with UCC filings.
0 coins
Jibriel Kohn
•Smart practice. Do you date stamp your search results somehow?
0 coins
Joshua Hellan
•Most search systems include a timestamp, but I also save them as PDFs with the search date in the filename. Belt and suspenders approach.
0 coins
Edison Estevez
Just want to add that some states are better than others with this. Delaware's system is pretty clean and consistent, but I've had major issues with Texas and California where the search results can be wildly different from the filed documents. Worth keeping in mind when you're dealing with multi-state filings.
0 coins
Emily Nguyen-Smith
•Texas is the worst! Their system seems to randomly capitalize letters and I swear it changes the format every few months.
0 coins
Edison Estevez
•Don't even get me started on their continuation process. Filed a UCC-3 continuation there last year and it took three attempts because the system kept rejecting it for 'debtor name mismatch' even though I copied the name exactly from the original filing.
0 coins
James Johnson
For what it's worth, I tried that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier and it actually caught a discrepancy I missed. Had a situation where our UCC-1 showed the debtor as 'Johnson Manufacturing Corp' but the continuation we filed somehow got entered as 'Johnson Manufacturing Co.' The search was showing both versions and I couldn't figure out which one was correct. The tool flagged it immediately when I uploaded both documents.
0 coins
Sophia Rodriguez
•That's exactly the kind of error that can cause problems down the line. Good catch.
0 coins
Mia Green
•Did you end up having to file an amendment to fix the name discrepancy?
0 coins
James Johnson
•Yeah, filed a UCC-3 amendment to correct the debtor name on the continuation. Better safe than sorry when it comes to lien perfection.
0 coins