UCC Document Community

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 :)

PixelWarrior

•

Make sure to check if any of the storage facilities have blanket liens or other creditor interests in stored goods. Some storage companies have policies about defaulted rent creating possessory liens that could complicate your security interest.

0 coins

QuantumLeap

•

I hadn't thought about that angle. I'll need to review the storage lease terms and make sure the rent payments are current.

0 coins

Also worth adding a provision to your loan agreement requiring the borrower to keep storage rent current and notify you of any payment issues.

0 coins

Alice Fleming

•

Based on your description, I'd strongly recommend filing UCC-3 amendments to add the storage facility addresses. While "all inventory now owned or hereafter acquired" is broad language, the fact that your original filing specified the primary business address creates ambiguity about whether the storage locations are covered. For $75k worth of collateral, the amendment filing costs are minimal compared to the risk of an unperfected security interest. Also consider adding language to your loan documents requiring borrower notification before moving inventory to new locations - this will help you stay ahead of these issues in the future.

0 coins

This is excellent comprehensive advice. I'm curious about the notification requirement you mentioned - would you structure that as a covenant in the loan agreement or as a condition precedent to future advances? Also, should we require advance written consent for new storage locations, or is notification sufficient? Given that this borrower already moved inventory without telling us, I want to make sure we have the right controls in place going forward.

0 coins

AstroExplorer

•

For what it's worth, I've started building a small buffer into our filing budgets for potential rejections and refiling fees. It's annoying to have to do this, but better than explaining cost overruns to clients after the fact.

0 coins

AstroExplorer

•

I usually add about 15-20% to the base filing costs. Covers most scenarios unless there are major complications.

0 coins

I do something similar but also factor in rush fees if we need expedited processing. Tennessee charges extra for that too now.

0 coins

Harper Hill

•

This whole Tennessee fee situation is such a headache! We're dealing with the same cost shock on our equipment financing deals. One thing that's helped us is batching filings when possible - at least we can spread the administrative time across multiple UCC-1s even if the per-filing cost is higher. Also learned the hard way to always run entity searches right before filing since Tennessee seems to be rejecting more filings for minor discrepancies. Has anyone tried reaching out to their state representatives about these increases? Wondering if there's any pushback from the business community on these fee hikes.

0 coins

StarGazer101

•

Great point about batching filings! I'm new to this community but have been dealing with similar UCC filing challenges in my state. The entity search tip is really valuable - I hadn't thought about doing that right before filing but it makes total sense given how strict they're getting with name matching. For the state representative outreach, you might want to coordinate with other lenders in Tennessee to present a unified business impact case. Sometimes these fee increases happen without much consideration for the cumulative effect on financing costs that ultimately get passed to borrowers.

0 coins

Update us when you get it resolved! I'm dealing with a similar EIDL termination issue and want to see what approach works.

0 coins

PixelWarrior

•

Same here. These EIDL terminations are turning into a nightmare for so many businesses.

0 coins

Amara Adebayo

•

The SBA really should have standardized the UCC-1 filing process better from the beginning. Would have saved everyone these headaches.

0 coins

This exact same thing happened to us! The original EIDL UCC-1 had our company name without the comma, but our current legal docs show it with the comma. What worked for us was pulling the actual original UCC-1 filing from the Secretary of State website and copying the debtor name character-for-character onto the UCC-3 termination form. Don't try to "fix" the name - just match exactly what's on the original filing. It's counterintuitive but that's how the system works. Also, if you're in a rush, definitely pay for expedited processing if your state offers it. We got ours processed same-day for an extra $35 fee. Good luck!

0 coins

Amina Toure

•

Update: Called Oklahoma SOS this morning and they confirmed the comma difference would cause rejection. Filing the amendment today and will do the continuation once it's processed. Thanks everyone for the guidance - this forum saved me from a major headache!

0 coins

At least Oklahoma SOS was helpful when you called. Sometimes they act like they can't be bothered to explain their own rules.

0 coins

NebulaNomad

•

Smart move calling them directly. Getting official confirmation prevents any surprises when you file.

0 coins

Ethan Brown

•

Great to hear you got clarity from Oklahoma SOS! That's exactly why I always recommend calling the filing office when there's any doubt about their requirements. A quick phone call can save weeks of back-and-forth with rejections. Make sure to keep notes on what they told you in case you need to reference it later. Good luck with the amendment filing!

0 coins

GalaxyGazer

•

Bottom line - don't overcomplicate your UCC-1 filing by bringing in concepts from the underlying purchase transaction. The security interest exists independently of how you acquired the collateral. Focus on clear collateral identification and proper debtor naming. That's what matters for perfection.

0 coins

AstroAlpha

•

Got it. Thanks everyone for clearing this up. I was definitely overcomplicating things by trying to connect two separate legal concepts.

0 coins

Aisha Mahmood

•

Glad this thread helped! I learned something too - never really thought about how timing of title transfer could affect when you can file the UCC-1.

0 coins

Ella Lewis

•

This thread perfectly illustrates why so many people get tripped up on international equipment deals! I've been doing UCC filings for 15 years and still see experienced attorneys mixing these up. The key insight that helped me early on was realizing that incoterms are about the SALE relationship (buyer-seller), while UCC is about the CREDIT relationship (borrower-lender). They're completely separate legal frameworks that just happen to involve the same physical assets. For your $180K equipment, stick to standard UCC collateral description practices - be specific about the machinery type, include serial numbers if available, and don't reference how you acquired it. The FOB Hamburg terms served their purpose during the international sale but have zero relevance to your security interest perfection.

0 coins

Mason Davis

•

Really appreciate this perspective from someone with 15 years of experience! The sale vs credit relationship distinction is brilliant - that's exactly the mental framework I needed. I kept trying to find connections between the two when they're addressing completely different legal questions. Your point about the FOB terms serving their purpose and now being irrelevant to the security interest makes perfect sense. Going to focus purely on the UCC Article 9 requirements for the collateral description and stop overthinking the purchase history.

0 coins

Prev1...177178179180181...684Next