UCC statement form keeps getting rejected - debtor name issues?

I thought I was being careful but let me double-check the original filing. The LLC designation might be the issue - I think the charter has it as 'L.L.C.' with periods but I've been writing 'LLC' on forms. Such a pain that these systems are so finicky about formatting.

Yeah the debtor name has to match EXACTLY. Even extra spaces will kill your filing. I learned this the hard way on a continuation that got rejected three times.

Illinois. And good point about charter amendments - I should probably pull the most recent version from the SOS database to be absolutely sure. This whole thing is making me paranoid about every detail.

Illinois can be tricky. Their portal usually gives you the exact field where the mismatch occurred if you look at the detailed rejection notice. Check for things like middle initials on personal guarantors too if those are listed as additional debtors.

ugh Illinois portal is the worst! I swear they reject filings just for fun sometimes. Make sure you're not including any weird characters that might not display properly in their system.

That sounds really useful. I've been staring at these forms cross-eyed trying to spot the difference. How accurate is their matching? I don't want to rely on a tool that might miss something important.

It's been spot-on in my experience. The tool specifically looks for the types of discrepancies that cause state rejections - name formatting, extra spaces, punctuation differences, stuff like that. Way better than trying to catch these details manually when you're stressed about deadlines.

Interesting, never heard of that service. Might be worth trying since manual review is so error-prone. These UCC forms have so many little details that can trip you up.

Good point. This is definitely an addition to the existing security interest, same lender and loan agreement. The original UCC-1 was filed in March so it should be good for years still. I did check the status online and it shows as active.

Perfect, then UCC-3 amendment is definitely the right route. Just make sure your collateral description for the new equipment is specific enough but not overly restrictive. You want to properly identify the CNC machine without limiting your security interest unnecessarily.

I tried calling but got transferred around and nobody seemed to know the specifics of why forms get rejected. They just kept telling me to 'check the debtor name matches exactly' which is what I thought I was doing.

Phone support for UCC filings is pretty much useless in most states. They usually just read you the same error message you can see online. Better to figure it out yourself or use tools that can actually identify the specific problems.

That's another good point. I've been copying the number from my confirmation email but maybe I should double-check against what actually shows up in the state database search.

Definitely do that. Sometimes the confirmation emails format numbers differently than how they're stored in the system. Always reference the official state database when you're doing amendments or continuations.

Yes! I made this mistake on a termination once. Email showed the filing number one way but the actual database had it formatted completely different. Took me three rejections to figure it out.

Using the online portal because I need this processed quickly. Paper filing would probably take weeks and the lender won't be happy about the delay. I guess I need to figure out what's causing the electronic rejection.

Makes sense. Try copying and pasting the debtor name directly from your original UCC-1 search results rather than retyping it. That way you know the formatting is exactly what their system expects.

We do have a DBA but I'm pretty sure I'm using the legal LLC name. Let me verify that against the Articles of Organization to be absolutely certain. This is turning into quite the detective work.

It really is like detective work sometimes. The good news is once you figure out the exact formatting issue, future filings will be much smoother since you'll know exactly how the state wants the names formatted.

This is why I always keep a master document with the exact formatting for all our regular debtors. Saves so much headache when you need to do amendments or continuations later.

That's the second mention of that tool. Sounds like it might be worth trying since I'm clearly missing something in my manual comparison. The deadline pressure is making me second-guess everything I'm looking at.

Yeah it's definitely worth it when you're under pressure. The tool is pretty quick - just upload both documents and it highlights any discrepancies. Much more reliable than trying to catch these details when you're stressed about deadlines.

Good catch. The lender is the same entity but they might have updated their address. I should verify that the secured party info I'm using matches exactly what was on the original filing rather than using their current letterhead.

Exactly. For amendments, everything has to match the original filing exactly unless you're specifically amending those details. Any changes to secured party info would need to be done through a separate amendment or you'd need to be very specific about what you're changing.

This is such a pain point with UCC filings. The rules are so strict about matching but the error messages are so vague. At least now there are better tools to help identify these issues before you submit.

Glad you got it sorted out! Those little punctuation details are so easy to miss but they'll kill your filing every time. At least now you know exactly how your debtor name needs to be formatted for future filings.

Great outcome! This is exactly the kind of formatting issue that trips up so many filers. The comma placement thing is super common - glad the document checker helped you spot it quickly.

Perfect example of why these UCC statement form rejections happen. The systems are so literal about name matching. Congrats on getting it resolved before your deadline!