UCC future advances clause rejected - debtor name issue or collateral description problem?
Having major headaches with a UCC future advances filing that keeps getting bounced back from the Secretary of State. This is for a $2.8M revolving credit facility where we need to secure potential future loan draws over the next 18 months. The debtor is a manufacturing LLC that's been expanding rapidly and will need additional equipment financing as they grow. Original UCC-1 was filed 3 years ago for their initial $1.2M term loan, but now we're trying to amend it to include future advances language for the new revolving facility. Problem is every time we submit the UCC-3 amendment, it gets rejected. The rejection notice just says 'debtor name discrepancy' but I've triple-checked the exact legal name against their articles of incorporation. The collateral description includes 'all equipment, inventory, accounts receivable, and future advances as may be made under Credit Agreement dated December 15, 2024.' Is this wording causing the problem? Some colleagues think the future advances reference needs to be more specific about dollar amounts or time periods, but I've seen plenty of filings with similar language that went through fine. Anyone dealt with future advances rejections lately? The borrower is getting antsy because they need to close on some new machinery purchases and can't move forward without the perfected security interest in place. Really need to figure out what's triggering these rejections.
37 comments
Join the conversation
Diego Vargas
Check the debtor's exact legal name format in your state's business registry first. I've seen this happen where the LLC designation was slightly different between the original filing and amendment - like 'LLC' vs 'L.L.C.' or missing/extra commas. The SOS systems are super picky about exact matches for amendments.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Good point, I pulled their current certificate of good standing and it shows 'Advanced Manufacturing Solutions, LLC' but our original UCC-1 might have just 'Advanced Manufacturing Solutions LLC' without the comma. That could definitely be it.
0 coins
Anastasia Fedorov
•Yep that comma thing has bitten me before too. Also make sure there's no period after LLC if the original didn't have one.
0 coins
StarStrider
Your future advances language looks fine to me - I use similar wording all the time. The real issue is probably that debtor name mismatch like the previous poster mentioned. But also check if your state requires specific future advances language in the financing statement vs just referencing it in the credit agreement. For what it's worth, I recently started using Certana.ai's document verification tool before filing amendments. You can upload your original UCC-1 and new UCC-3 PDFs and it instantly flags any inconsistencies in debtor names, filing numbers, or other details. Saved me from several rejections already.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Never heard of Certana.ai but that sounds super helpful. Is it accurate with catching the small formatting differences?
0 coins
StarStrider
•Yeah it's really good at spotting those tiny discrepancies that cause rejections. Much faster than manually comparing documents line by line.
0 coins
Sean Doyle
•I'll have to check that out too, getting tired of these manual document reviews taking forever.
0 coins
Zara Rashid
OH NO this is exactly what happened to me last month!!! My future advances filing got rejected THREE times and I was pulling my hair out. Turns out the debtor had filed a name change with the state that I didn't know about. They were still doing business under the old name but legally they had updated their LLC name by like one word. Did you run a current UCC search on the debtor to see what name shows up on existing filings? That might tell you if there's been any changes since your original filing.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Ugh that's my worst fear. I'll run a fresh search tomorrow morning. The borrower swears they haven't changed anything but you never know.
0 coins
Zara Rashid
•Yeah they might not even realize they did it! Sometimes lawyers file amendments to articles of incorporation for other reasons and the name gets slightly tweaked in the process.
0 coins
Luca Romano
•This is why I always do a fresh business entity search before any UCC amendment, learned that lesson the hard way too.
0 coins
Nia Jackson
The SOS rejection systems are getting ridiculous with their pickiness. I had a filing rejected because I used 'Co.' instead of 'Company' even though both versions appeared in different corporate documents. For future advances, most states don't require you to specify dollar amounts or time periods in the UCC filing itself - that's handled in your credit agreement. Your collateral description should be fine as written.
0 coins
Mateo Hernandez
•Totally agree the systems are way too picky now. Makes me wonder if they're trying to generate more filing fees from all the rejections and re-submissions.
0 coins
Nia Jackson
•Wouldn't surprise me honestly. The number of technical rejections has definitely increased over the past couple years.
0 coins
CosmicCruiser
I handle a lot of revolving credit facilities and your approach sounds right. The key thing with future advances is making sure your original UCC-1 had broad enough collateral language to cover what you're trying to add now. If your original filing only covered specific equipment or a narrow set of assets, you might need to file a new UCC-1 instead of amending the existing one. What was the collateral description on your original filing?
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Original filing covered 'all equipment and machinery' but the new facility includes inventory and A/R too. Should I be doing a new UCC-1 instead of amending?
0 coins
CosmicCruiser
•Yeah if you're adding new collateral types that weren't in the original, a new UCC-1 might be cleaner than trying to amend. Less chance for rejection.
0 coins
Aisha Khan
•I'd definitely go with a fresh UCC-1 for new collateral types. Amendments get scrutinized more heavily.
0 coins
Ethan Taylor
Been doing UCC filings for 15 years and future advances language has never been an issue by itself. This is almost certainly a debtor name problem. The rejection notice usually gives you more detail though - did you check if there was a longer explanation attached to the rejection email?
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•The rejection was pretty brief, just said 'debtor name does not match existing records' but didn't specify which part was wrong.
0 coins
Ethan Taylor
•Typical. They could at least highlight what part doesn't match. Have you tried calling the UCC section directly?
0 coins
Yuki Ito
Quick question - are you filing in the state where the debtor is organized or where the collateral is located? For LLCs you need to file in their state of organization, not necessarily where their business operates.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•They're a Delaware LLC but operating in Ohio. I filed in Delaware since that's where they're organized.
0 coins
Yuki Ito
•Good, that's correct. Just wanted to make sure since that's another common source of problems.
0 coins
Carmen Lopez
This might sound crazy but I had a similar issue that turned out to be a problem with the PDF formatting when I submitted electronically. The SOS system couldn't read certain characters properly and it was mangling the debtor name during processing. Try re-typing the debtor name instead of copy-pasting it from another document.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Interesting, I did copy-paste from their corporate docs. I'll try typing it fresh on the next attempt.
0 coins
Andre Dupont
•I've heard of this happening too, especially with special characters or certain fonts.
0 coins
QuantumQuasar
Just went through this exact same thing with a client's revolving credit line. After two rejections I used Certana.ai to cross-check my UCC-3 against the original UCC-1 and it caught that I had an extra space in the middle of the debtor name. Such a tiny thing but it was enough to trigger the rejection. Once I fixed that the amendment went through immediately. Really wish I had used that tool from the start, would have saved a week of delays.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•That's exactly the kind of thing I'm worried about. Going to try that Certana tool before my next submission.
0 coins
Zoe Papanikolaou
•Yeah those document checkers are becoming essential with how picky the filing systems are getting.
0 coins
Jamal Wilson
Make sure you're using the correct UCC-3 form type too. Some states have different amendment forms for adding collateral vs. continuing the filing vs. other changes. If you're adding new collateral types you might need an 'additional collateral' amendment rather than a general amendment.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•I used the standard amendment form but I'll double-check if there's a specific form for collateral additions.
0 coins
Jamal Wilson
•Delaware's pretty straightforward but worth verifying. Their UCC section website should have form instructions.
0 coins
Mei Lin
•Some states are really particular about which amendment form you use for different types of changes.
0 coins
Liam Fitzgerald
Update us when you figure it out! I'm dealing with a similar situation and want to know what the solution ends up being.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Will do! Going to try the document verification tool first, then re-file with extra attention to the exact debtor name formatting.
0 coins
Amara Nnamani
•Following this thread too, dealing with my own future advances headaches.
0 coins