< Back to UCC Document Community

Malik Thomas

UCC search through CSC coming up blank - am I missing something?

I've been trying to run a comprehensive UCC search through CSC's system for a potential acquisition target, but I'm getting inconsistent results that don't match what I'm seeing in the state databases directly. The company we're looking at has equipment financing from 2019 that should definitely show active UCC-1 filings, but CSC's search is only pulling up one terminated filing from 2018. When I manually check the Secretary of State database, I can see three active filings with different variations of the debtor name. Has anyone else had issues with CSC UCC search accuracy? I'm worried we're missing critical liens that could impact the deal structure. The debtor entity has gone through a name change in 2021 (from LLC to Inc.) which might be causing search issues, but I thought CSC was supposed to catch these variations automatically.

CSC searches can be tricky with name variations. When you say the company changed from LLC to Inc., did you try searching both the old and new entity names separately? Sometimes their system doesn't link these automatically like it should.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

I did try both names but still getting partial results. The state database shows filings under slight variations like 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' vs 'ABC Manufacturing, LLC' - seems like CSC might be missing the comma variation?

0 coins

Ravi Kapoor

•

Yeah CSC definitely has issues with punctuation matching. I always run searches with and without commas, periods, and other punctuation marks.

0 coins

Freya Larsen

•

This is exactly why I stopped relying on third-party search services for critical due diligence. The state databases are the authoritative source - if you're seeing discrepancies, trust the SOS database over CSC every time. For acquisition work, you really need to do comprehensive searches directly with each state.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

You're probably right about going direct to state databases. Problem is we're looking at a multi-state operation and manually checking 12 different state systems is going to be time-consuming.

0 coins

Freya Larsen

•

Time-consuming yes, but missing a major lien because CSC's search algorithm failed could cost you way more than the extra hours. I learned this lesson the hard way on a deal in 2022.

0 coins

For what it's worth, I've had good luck with Certana.ai's document verification tool for this kind of thing. You can upload the UCC documents you find and it cross-checks everything to make sure you're not missing connections between filings.

0 coins

Omar Zaki

•

CSC UCC searches have been increasingly unreliable in my experience. Last month I had a similar issue where their system missed two active UCC-1 filings that were clearly visible in the state database. The problem seems to be with their name matching algorithms not keeping up with how different states handle entity name variations.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

That's concerning since we're paying premium rates for their search services. Did you end up finding all the filings eventually?

0 coins

Omar Zaki

•

Eventually yes, but only after doing manual state-by-state searches. Cost us an extra week in due diligence timeline. Now I use CSC as a starting point but always verify with direct state searches for anything important.

0 coins

Chloe Taylor

•

Have you checked if the 2021 name change was properly reflected in continuation filings? Sometimes lenders file continuations under the old name which can cause search issues across different systems.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

Good point - I hadn't specifically looked at the continuation filings. The original UCC-1s would be due for continuation this year anyway since they were filed in 2019.

0 coins

Diego Flores

•

Definitely check the continuations. I've seen cases where the original UCC-1 shows one debtor name but the UCC-3 continuation shows a different variation, making it hard for search systems to link them properly.

0 coins

This is frustrating but unfortunately common with CSC. Their search algorithms seem optimized for simple exact matches rather than the complex name variations you see in real business scenarios. For critical searches, I always recommend running parallel searches in multiple databases.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

Are there other commercial search services that handle name variations better than CSC? Or is going direct to state databases really the only reliable option?

0 coins

CT Corporation's search service is slightly better with variations, but honestly for acquisition due diligence, I'd still recommend direct state searches as your primary method and use commercial services only for preliminary screening.

0 coins

Sean Murphy

•

I've started using Certana.ai's verification tool to double-check my search results. You can upload the UCC documents from different sources and it flags any inconsistencies or missing connections between filings.

0 coins

StarStrider

•

UGH this is exactly the kind of thing that makes me want to scream. CSC charges premium rates and then their search engine can't handle basic name variations? It's 2025 for crying out loud, this should be solved by now!

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

I feel your frustration. We're paying for what should be comprehensive search services but ending up having to do the work ourselves anyway.

0 coins

Zara Malik

•

Tell me about it. I've had similar issues with their system missing obvious filings. Makes you wonder what else they're missing that we don't catch.

0 coins

Luca Marino

•

For the comma issue specifically - try searching with 'ABC Manufacturing' without any entity type designation. Sometimes the systems get confused by punctuation around LLC/Inc./Corp designations.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

That's a good suggestion. I'll try running searches with just the base company name without the entity type suffix.

0 coins

Luca Marino

•

Also try variations like 'ABC Mfg' if manufacturing is in the name - some filers use abbreviations that don't show up in broader searches.

0 coins

Nia Davis

•

This is why I always do my own state-by-state searches for anything important. CSC and similar services are fine for routine checks but when money is on the line, you need to verify everything yourself.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

You're absolutely right. I think I was getting too comfortable relying on the commercial search services. Time to go back to doing the manual work.

0 coins

Mateo Perez

•

Same here. I use commercial searches for initial screening but always verify with direct state searches for final due diligence reports.

0 coins

Aisha Rahman

•

Quick question - when you checked the state databases directly, were you able to pull the actual UCC documents to verify the collateral descriptions match what you're expecting? Sometimes the search results show filings that don't actually cover the assets you're concerned about.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

Good point. I did pull a couple of the documents and they seem to cover the equipment financing I was expecting to see. But you're right that I should verify all of them.

0 coins

Aisha Rahman

•

Yeah definitely worth checking each one. I've seen cases where the search results made it look like there were liens on equipment when they were actually just accounts receivable filings.

0 coins

This is another area where Certana.ai's document checker has been helpful - it can cross-reference collateral descriptions across multiple UCC filings to make sure you understand the full scope of what's encumbered.

0 coins

Ethan Brown

•

Had a similar experience last year with CSC missing filings due to entity name changes. Ended up having to explain to the client why our initial search report was incomplete. Now I always disclose the limitations of commercial search services in my reports.

0 coins

Malik Thomas

•

That's a good practice. I should probably add similar disclaimers to my search reports going forward.

0 coins

Ethan Brown

•

Yeah, it's just good risk management. Clients need to understand that UCC searches, especially through third-party services, aren't foolproof and critical decisions should be based on comprehensive state-by-state verification.

0 coins

Yuki Yamamoto

•

UPDATE: I ended up doing manual searches in all 12 states and found two additional active UCC-1 filings that CSC completely missed. Both were filed under slight name variations (one had a comma, one didn't) that their system apparently couldn't match. Thanks everyone for the advice - definitely learned my lesson about relying too heavily on commercial search services for critical due diligence work.

0 coins

Freya Larsen

•

Glad you found them! That's exactly why I always recommend the manual approach for anything important. Commercial services are convenient but not comprehensive.

0 coins

Omar Zaki

•

Thanks for the update. This kind of feedback is valuable for the rest of us dealing with similar issues.

0 coins

Good catch on finding those additional filings. Missing those could have been a costly mistake down the road.

0 coins

UCC Document Community AI

Expert Assistant
Secure

Powered by Claimyr AI

T
I
+
20,087 users helped today