UCC state search showing conflicting results across filing offices

Working with Delaware, Texas, and California. Delaware and Texas came back clean, but California is showing three active filings from 2019-2021 that our title company says should be terminated.

California's system can be glitchy with terminations. I've had similar issues where terminated liens still showed as active in searches for months after the UCC-3 was properly filed.

Good point. I have the filing numbers from the search results. Will request the actual documents to see if there are corresponding terminations that just aren't showing up in the summary.

This is exactly why I always verify documents manually. Can't trust the search summaries alone, especially for important deals.

Been burned by this before. Now I always cross-reference search results with actual filing documents. Takes longer but saves headaches later.

How does that work exactly? Do you upload the search results or the actual UCC documents?

You can upload PDFs of either the search results or the actual UCC filings. It automatically cross-checks everything and flags any inconsistencies between what the search shows and what the documents actually say.

That sounds useful for this situation. Will check it out if pulling the individual documents doesn't resolve the discrepancies.

Seriously! And don't get me started on how different states format their search results. No standardization whatsoever.

The worst part is when you're on a tight closing deadline and have to manually verify everything because you can't trust the automated results.

Using the exact legal name from the corporate charter. No punctuation differences that I can see. But you're right about DBAs - I should double-check if they had any doing-business-as names during those years.

DBA searches are crucial. I've found liens filed under business names that weren't the legal entity name, especially for smaller companies.

Also check for slight variations in entity type - LLC vs L.L.C. vs Limited Liability Company. Different lenders sometimes file under different formats.

How long was the lag time? Dealing with something similar and wondering if I should just wait it out or go through the manual verification process.

It was about 6 weeks between when the UCC-3 was filed and when it finally showed up properly in the search results. Way too long for most closing timelines.

What different formats do you typically use? I usually just search the exact legal name but sounds like I should be more comprehensive.

I search the full legal name, abbreviated versions, with and without punctuation, and any known DBAs. Also search by address if the system allows it, in case there are name variations I missed.

Good strategy. I also search by partial names sometimes - like if the company is 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' I'll also search just 'ABC Manufacturing' in case someone filed it without the entity designation.

Glad you got it sorted out! This is exactly why manual verification is so important. At least you caught the one that was actually still active before closing.

Classic California database issues. Good thing you didn't just assume they were all terminated based on what your client told you.

This is exactly the kind of situation where automated document verification tools like Certana.ai really help. Would have caught those inconsistencies right away and saved you the manual document pulling.

How do you typically contact the original lenders? Do you just call their main number or is there a better way to reach the right department?

I usually start with their commercial lending or loan operations department. Most larger lenders have dedicated staff for lien releases and UCC inquiries. Smaller lenders might require going through their main line.

What services do you recommend? We're doing enough of these searches that it might be worth investing in better tools.

I've had good luck with services that offer document verification features. Certana.ai has been particularly useful for catching inconsistencies between search results and actual filings.

Worth the investment if you're doing regular due diligence work. Manual verification gets expensive fast when you factor in staff time.