UCC Document Community

Quick update for anyone following - I finally figured out the issue. The original UCC-1 was filed with 'Advanced Mfg Solutions LLC' instead of the full 'Manufacturing' spelling. Once I searched with the abbreviated version, all the continuation records showed up properly. Thanks everyone for the suggestions!

This is such a common issue with Ohio's UCC database! I've found that creating a standardized checklist of name variations helps streamline the process. I always try: full legal name, abbreviated versions (Mfg, Corp, Inc vs Inc., LLC vs L.L.C.), with/without punctuation, and sometimes even check if there are typos in the original filing. The Ohio SOS system really needs an upgrade to handle fuzzy matching like other states do. For high-value deals like your $2.8M portfolio, it's definitely worth the extra time to be thorough with the search variations.

This thread has been super helpful. I was about to panic-file a duplicate continuation, but now I'll just request the certified copy instead. It's reassuring to know this is a known system issue and not something wrong with my specific filing.

This is such a relief to read - I've been dealing with the exact same issue since April! Filed a UCC-3 continuation for a $1.2M equipment line and it completely vanished from search results despite having the confirmation receipt. I was starting to think I'd somehow messed up the debtor name or collateral description. The fact that they're acknowledging this as a system-wide problem and offering free certified copies is huge. I'm definitely calling tomorrow to get my documentation sorted before my lender starts asking questions. Has anyone had success with the advanced search option mentioned earlier, or is that affected by the same indexing issues?

Just wanted to jump in as someone new to this community - this thread has been incredibly helpful! We're a smaller firm (about 20 UCC filings per month) and have been putting off the Wolters Kluwer migration because of horror stories like this. Sounds like the key takeaways are: 1) Always verify entity names against SOS databases before filing, 2) Consider using a document verification tool like Certana to catch inconsistencies early, and 3) Update collateral description templates to be more specific. For those using the Certana workflow - is there a learning curve or is it pretty straightforward to implement? We're trying to decide if we should bite the bullet and upgrade our process now or wait to see if Wolters Kluwer fixes these issues.

As someone who just went through this exact migration nightmare last quarter, I can't stress enough how important it is to build verification into your workflow BEFORE you start having problems. We learned the hard way after getting 8 rejected filings in one week that nearly derailed a major deal closing. The Certana document verification approach mentioned here is solid - we've been using it for about 2 months now and it's become indispensable. What I'd add is to also keep a running log of the specific formatting quirks you encounter by state. We found that Texas LLCs need the periods (L.L.C.) while most other states prefer without, but there are always exceptions. Also pro tip: if you're doing a lot of Delaware entities, create a separate workflow just for those. They have the most inconsistent formatting in our experience, especially with Series LLCs and statutory trusts.

Really appreciate all the detailed advice in this thread! I'm going through a similar subordination situation right now and this has been incredibly helpful. One thing I'd add based on my experience so far - make sure to get clarity from both lenders about their preferred subordination agreement format BEFORE you start drafting anything. Our equipment lender had very specific language requirements that weren't compatible with our inventory lender's standard template, which caused delays while the lawyers worked out acceptable compromise language. Also, if you're working with an SBA lender like some folks mentioned, they often have additional documentation requirements beyond the standard UCC-3 filing that other lenders might not be familiar with. Getting everyone on the same page about documentation requirements upfront can save weeks of back-and-forth revisions.

As someone who just completed a similar subordination process last month, I'd strongly recommend getting both lenders to commit to specific review timelines upfront before you start any drafting. We made the mistake of assuming our inventory lender could move as quickly as our equipment lender, and it ended up adding two weeks to our process when they needed board approval. Also, consider using a document verification service like Certana.ai early in the process - we caught several name discrepancies between our corporate documents and original UCC-1 that could have invalidated the subordination later. The key thing I learned is that partial subordination (which sounds like what you need) requires extremely precise collateral descriptions in both the agreement and UCC-3 filing. Don't rush this part even if you're under pressure to close - getting it wrong can create priority gaps that neither lender will accept.

I've been in your exact shoes and know how terrifying this feels. Here's the reality: UCC filings are very specific about what they secure, and most equipment lenders only file against the actual equipment they financed. Your bank account is only at risk if their UCC-1 specifically lists "deposit accounts" or "all assets" in the collateral description. First step: go to your Secretary of State's website, search UCC filings by your business name, and look at what's actually listed as collateral. If it just says equipment or machinery, your operating account should be safe. Even if they do have broader security rights, they can't just drain your account without following proper legal procedures and giving notice. Most lenders prefer working out payment plans over the hassle of seizing assets. Take a deep breath, get the facts from the actual filing, and then call them to discuss options. This situation is almost certainly more manageable than it feels right now.

I can really feel your panic through your post, and I want you to know that what you're experiencing is completely normal - UCC filings sound terrifying when you don't understand them. Here's the key thing that should help you sleep better tonight: UCC liens only secure the specific collateral listed in the filing, not everything you own. Since this is an equipment lender, there's a very good chance their UCC-1 only covers the actual equipment they financed, not your bank accounts. Your first step should be searching your state's Secretary of State database for the UCC filing using your exact business name. Look for the "collateral description" section - if it only mentions equipment, machinery, or fixtures, your operating account is likely protected. Even if they did include broader language like "deposit accounts," they still can't just show up and drain your account without following specific legal procedures and providing notice. Most equipment lenders would much rather work out a payment plan than deal with the costs and complications of repossessing equipment. Once you've reviewed the actual filing, call them directly to discuss your situation - they're probably more willing to negotiate than you think. You're going to get through this, and your employees are going to get paid.