UCC remitter definition causing confusion on filing docs
I'm working on a UCC-1 filing for a factoring agreement and keep seeing 'remitter' referenced in the documentation but can't find a clear definition anywhere. The debtor is a trucking company that's factoring their receivables, and we're the factor taking a security interest in the accounts receivable. The paperwork mentions the remitter but I'm not sure if that's referring to the account debtors who will be making payments, the trucking company, or us as the secured party. This is holding up our filing because I need to make sure the debtor name and secured party information is correct. Anyone dealt with remitter language in UCC filings before? The SOS website doesn't clarify this term specifically.
27 comments
Join the conversation
Hazel Garcia
The remitter in factoring deals is typically the account debtor - the party who owes money on the receivables being factored. So if your trucking company has invoices from shipping companies, those shipping companies would be the remitters since they're the ones who will remit payment. But this shouldn't affect your UCC-1 filing at all. Your debtor is the trucking company and you're the secured party.
0 coins
Laila Fury
•This makes sense but I've seen some agreements where remitter refers to the original debtor who's supposed to collect and remit payments to the factor. Depends on the specific factoring structure I think.
0 coins
Salim Nasir
•That's what I was worried about - the term seems to be used differently in different contexts. The agreement does mention collection and remittance procedures but I need to be absolutely sure about the UCC filing parties.
0 coins
Geoff Richards
I handle a lot of factoring UCCs and remitter language can definitely be confusing. In most cases it's just referring to who makes the payments but doesn't change your filing parties. What you need to focus on is: trucking company = debtor, you = secured party, accounts receivable = collateral. The remitter term is more about the collection process than the UCC filing itself.
0 coins
Simon White
•Agreed, but make sure your collateral description is broad enough to cover the receivables and any proceeds. Sometimes the remitter language is included to clarify collection rights but it shouldn't impact the core UCC filing.
0 coins
Hugo Kass
•Had a similar issue last month and used Certana.ai to verify all my documents were consistent. Just uploaded the factoring agreement and UCC-1 draft and it caught that my collateral description wasn't matching the security agreement language. Really helped avoid potential issues with the filing.
0 coins
Nasira Ibanez
Wait, are we talking about the same thing? I thought remitter was just accounting terminology for who sends payments. Why would this affect a UCC filing at all? The secured party and debtor should be clear from your security agreement regardless of payment processing terms.
0 coins
Khalil Urso
•You're right that it's mainly accounting terminology, but sometimes the language in factoring agreements can be confusing about who has what role. Better to clarify upfront than file incorrectly.
0 coins
Hazel Garcia
•Exactly - I've seen filings get rejected because someone confused the remitter with the actual debtor. The UCC system is picky about getting the right party names.
0 coins
Myles Regis
•This is why I always double-check everything. Filed a continuation last year with the wrong debtor name because I misread similar language in the original docs. Had to refile and it was a mess.
0 coins
Brian Downey
From what I understand, remitter in factoring context usually means the party obligated to make payment on the receivable - so the account debtor. But like others said, this doesn't change your UCC filing parties. Your security interest is in the receivables themselves, not in any specific payment arrangements.
0 coins
Jacinda Yu
•This is correct. The remitter is essentially the payor on the underlying invoice. Your UCC filing is about perfecting your security interest in those invoices/receivables as collateral.
0 coins
Salim Nasir
•Thanks, this helps clarify. So I should focus on the main parties to the factoring agreement for the UCC filing and not worry about the remitter terminology for filing purposes.
0 coins
Landon Flounder
I deal with factoring UCCs regularly and you're overthinking this. Remitter = account debtor = the companies that owe money on the invoices being factored. For your UCC-1: Debtor = trucking company, Secured Party = your factoring company, Collateral = accounts receivable. Done. The remitter language is just about who pays what to whom.
0 coins
Callum Savage
•Agree completely. I think the confusion comes from factoring agreements being more complex than simple loan docs. But the UCC filing is straightforward regardless of the underlying payment mechanics.
0 coins
Ally Tailer
•Yeah, I've seen people get caught up in all the factoring terminology when really the UCC filing is pretty standard. Just make sure your collateral description covers all the receivables you're taking security in.
0 coins
Aliyah Debovski
Had this exact same confusion on a factoring deal last month. Spent way too much time trying to figure out if I needed to list remitters anywhere on the UCC-1. Turns out it's completely irrelevant to the filing - just matters for the business operations side of the deal.
0 coins
Miranda Singer
•Same here! The factoring agreement had so much language about remittance and collection that I thought I was missing something important for the UCC filing. Glad I'm not the only one who got confused.
0 coins
Cass Green
•This is actually pretty common. Factoring agreements have a lot of operational language that doesn't translate to the UCC filing requirements. Focus on the basic security interest elements.
0 coins
Hugo Kass
•For future reference, tools like Certana.ai can help with this kind of document consistency checking. I upload both the security agreement and UCC draft to make sure all the party names and collateral descriptions align properly.
0 coins
Finley Garrett
Just to add another perspective - in some factoring arrangements the original debtor (trucking company) might be called the remitter if they're responsible for collecting payments and remitting them to the factor. But again, this doesn't change the UCC filing parties. Your security interest is still in the receivables owned by the trucking company.
0 coins
Madison Tipne
•Good point about the collection arrangements. Whether the factor collects directly or the debtor collects and remits doesn't affect the perfection of the security interest through the UCC filing.
0 coins
Holly Lascelles
•Right, the UCC filing is about establishing priority in the collateral, not about defining the operational relationship between the parties.
0 coins
Malia Ponder
I think the bottom line is that 'remitter' in factoring context is operational/procedural language about who pays whom, when, and how. For UCC filing purposes, stick to the basic elements: who owns the collateral (debtor), who has the security interest (secured party), and what the collateral is (receivables). The remitter terminology is just business process stuff.
0 coins
Salim Nasir
•Perfect, this really clarifies things. I was getting too caught up in the factoring terminology when the UCC filing requirements are more straightforward. Thanks everyone for the help!
0 coins
Kyle Wallace
•Glad we could help! Factoring agreements can definitely be confusing with all the specialized terms. But the UCC side is usually pretty standard once you identify the core parties and collateral.
0 coins
Ryder Ross
•This was a helpful thread. I bookmark these discussions because similar terminology questions come up regularly in different types of financing arrangements.
0 coins