Ask the community...
- DO post questions about your issues.
- DO answer questions and support each other.
- DO post tips & tricks to help folks.
- DO NOT post call problems here - there is a support tab at the top for that :)
Join the conversation
Join the conversation
UPDATE: We finally got it resolved! Turns out Delaware wanted the DocuSign signature to include the signer's title AND company name in the signature block, not just their name. Once we reformatted with 'John Smith, CFO, ABC Corp' instead of just 'John Smith' it went through immediately. Thanks everyone for the suggestions - definitely going to use that document verification tool someone mentioned for our next big filing to catch these formatting issues upfront.
Good to know about the title requirement. I'll update our signature blocks to include that.
Jamal Brown
•This is exactly why having a tool to check document formatting is so valuable. Saves so much time and frustration.
Mei Liu
This is such a valuable thread - thank you for the detailed update! As someone relatively new to UCC filings, I had no idea that Delaware required the signer's title and company name in the signature block. I've been using just names in my DocuSign blocks and would have run into the exact same issue. Definitely bookmarking this discussion and looking into that Certana.ai tool others mentioned to avoid these formatting pitfalls. It's frustrating that these requirements aren't clearly documented anywhere, but at least we can learn from each other's experiences here.
Totally agree! I'm also pretty new to UCC work and this thread has been incredibly educational. It's amazing how many little technical requirements can derail a filing that otherwise looks perfect. The fact that different states have such varying interpretations of what should be standard UCC requirements is really eye-opening. I'm definitely going to start being more careful about signature block formatting from the get-go rather than learning these lessons the hard way like the OP did.
Join the conversation
Mason Kaczka
Bottom line for OP - yes, UCC absolutely applies to loans when those loans are secured by personal property. The loan type doesn't matter nearly as much as the collateral type. When in doubt, file the UCC-1. It's cheap insurance for your security interest.
Thanks everyone! This has been incredibly helpful. Sounds like I need to shift my thinking from 'what type of loan' to 'what type of collateral' when deciding on UCC filings. Going to implement a better tracking system for continuations too.
Sophia Russo
•You've got it! And don't hesitate to ask questions - UCC law can be tricky and the stakes are high if you get it wrong. Better to over-file than under-file in most cases.
As a newcomer to UCC filings, I found this thread extremely helpful! One question I have - when you're dealing with a business line of credit where the collateral might change over time (like inventory that gets sold and replenished), do you need to file amendments to the UCC-1, or does the original filing with a general description of "inventory" cover the changing collateral pool? I'm seeing some conflicting guidance on this.
Ava Martinez
•Great question! For revolving collateral like inventory, your original UCC-1 filing with a general description of "inventory" typically covers the changing pool - you don't need to file amendments every time inventory turns over. That's actually one of the key benefits of UCC filings for working capital facilities. The original filing creates what's called a "floating lien" that automatically attaches to new inventory as it's acquired. Just make sure your security agreement language is broad enough to cover "all inventory now owned or hereafter acquired" or similar language. You'd only need amendments if you're adding completely new types of collateral categories (like going from inventory-only to inventory + equipment).
Join the conversation
UPDATE: Called Delaware SOS this morning and they confirmed LoanPal, LLC is the correct legal name. Also found two existing UCC-1s filed against them using that exact format. Refiling today with the corrected name. Thanks everyone!
Luca Bianchi
•Perfect example of why you always check state records first. Good catch on the Delaware vs Nevada thing too.
Great news! Next time definitely try that document checker tool upfront - would have caught both the name and state issues immediately.
Ava Thompson
Great to see this resolved! For future reference, I always do a quick three-step check before filing any UCC: 1) Search the business entity database in the debtor's state of incorporation, 2) Check existing UCC filings against that debtor to see accepted name formats, and 3) Verify I'm filing in the correct state (incorporation state, not equipment location). These simple steps have saved me countless rejections over the years. Solar financing companies especially tend to have different operating names vs legal names.
Join the conversation
Keep copies of everything! Both the original UCC-1s and the termination statements. Your auditors will want to see the complete chain of filings.
Omar Farouk
•This. And make sure your filing fee calculations are right. Nothing worse than having terminations rejected for insufficient fees.
CosmicCadet
•Electronic filing usually calculates fees automatically, but double-check anyway. Some states have weird add-on fees.
Chloe Harris
Just finished a similar cleanup project. The Certana verification approach really does work well - uploaded our original UCC documents and it flagged like 8 potential name mismatches I would have missed. Way faster than manual review and caught stuff that would have definitely caused rejections.
Chloe Harris
•About 3 weeks total for 35 terminations across 6 states. Most of that was waiting for state processing times, not the actual prep work.
That timeline sounds reasonable for the scope. Did you run into any issues with the automated verification flagging false positives, or was it pretty accurate at identifying real discrepancies?
Luca Romano
Glad it worked out! Illinois really needs to upgrade their search system. It's 2025 and we're still dealing with these basic technical problems.
0 coins
Nia Jackson
•Couldn't agree more. Other states have much more reliable real-time search capabilities.
0 coins
NebulaNova
•At least they're better than some states that still require paper filings for certain types of UCCs.
0 coins
Mei Wong
This is such a common issue with Illinois! I've been doing UCC filings for about 8 years and their search database has always been unreliable. The key thing to remember is that your security interest is perfected from the moment of acceptance - that confirmation email is your legal proof. I always tell my clients to save that email as their primary evidence of filing. The search function is just a convenience tool, not the actual legal record. For future filings, I've found it helpful to call the UCC division a few days after filing to confirm everything is properly indexed, especially for high-value collateral like yours. Don't stress too much - you're protected!
0 coins
Isabella Oliveira
•This is really helpful advice, especially about calling the UCC division for verification! I'm relatively new to secured transactions and had no idea that search delays were this common in Illinois. Your point about the confirmation email being the actual legal proof is reassuring - I was getting worried that something might be wrong with my filing. Do you have any other tips for dealing with lenders who might not understand these technical delays? Mine keeps asking for "searchable proof" even though I've explained the situation.
0 coins
Mateo Sanchez
•@Isabella Oliveira For stubborn lenders, I usually send them the Illinois UCC statute citation 810 (ILCS 5/9-523 which) clearly states that a financing statement is effective when the filing office accepts it, regardless of search availability. Most attorneys understand this once they see the legal reference. You can also ask the UCC division to provide written confirmation that your filing is on record - they ll'usually email or fax a verification letter within 24 hours. I ve'found that combining the statute citation with official verification from the state usually satisfies even the most nervous lenders. The key is educating them that the search database is separate from the actual filing system.
0 coins