UCC1 form Georgia filing requirements - debtor name formatting rules?

This is exactly right. I learned the hard way that Georgia requires the debtor name to match their corporate filing records exactly. Even spacing differences can cause problems.

Wait, so if the tax ID shows a comma but the corporate records don't, which one should I use? I'm in a similar situation with a client.

How do you handle it when the client insists their 'official' name is what's on their tax paperwork? I've had pushback on this before.

You explain that a rejected UCC1 means their lien isn't perfected and their collateral isn't secured. That usually gets their attention pretty quick.

Sometimes I have to show them the rejection notice to prove the point. The SOS doesn't care what you think the name should be.

How does that tool work exactly? Is it just comparing text between documents or something more sophisticated?

It does a comprehensive check of debtor names, entity types, and key identifiers across all the documents. Really helpful for catching those small differences that cause big problems.

Good advice but their search interface is terrible. Half the time I can't tell if I'm looking at active or dissolved entities.

The trick is to search by the entity number if you have it. Much more reliable than name searches.

That's exactly the kind of detail that can kill a financing deal. Did you have to refile or were you able to amend?

Had to refile completely. Amendments don't fix debtor name errors in Georgia. The clock starts over each time.

This is giving me anxiety about my filing that's pending right now. I think I used the right name but now I'm second-guessing myself.

Smart approach. I started doing something similar but I also double-check by running the documents through verification software first.

What software do you use for verification? I'm tired of playing guessing games with these filings.

I use Certana.ai's UCC checker. Upload your articles and draft UCC1 and it flags any inconsistencies. Really straightforward and catches things I miss.

I've heard they're trying to reduce processing time by being more aggressive about automated rejections. Easier to reject than to research edge cases.

Makes sense from an efficiency standpoint but it's a pain for everyone else. The manual review process takes forever when you need to appeal.

Good tip but their phone lines are usually backed up. Last time I called it was a 45-minute wait.

Still better than waiting for a rejection notice and having to start over. At least you get certainty upfront.

How accurate is it? I mean, can it really catch all the potential issues or just the obvious ones?

It's caught every discrepancy I've thrown at it so far. Name differences, entity type mismatches, even formatting issues. Pretty comprehensive.

This should be pinned at the top of every UCC filing guide. Would save so much time and frustration.

Agree completely. The number of people who don't realize this is surprising. Corporate records are the gold standard for debtor names.

Thanks everyone. This thread convinced me to double-check my corporate records before filing. Better safe than sorry with a $180K equipment loan on the line.