


Ask the community...
UPDATE: I ended up consulting with a banking attorney who confirmed that the federal reserve deposits are subject to UCC Article 9 in our state. Used detailed collateral language specifying the Fed bank and account identifiers, plus ran everything through Certana.ai's verification tool which caught a debtor name mismatch I hadn't noticed. Filed electronically yesterday and got confirmation this morning. Thanks everyone for the guidance on this UCC financing statement federal reserve situation!
Nice work getting legal confirmation on the Article 9 applicability. That's always the smart move with federal banking collateral.
As someone who's handled several federal reserve collateral deals, I'd recommend being extra cautious about the deposit account control agreements too. Even with a perfect UCC-1 filing, you'll want to make sure the lender has proper control over those Fed accounts through the appropriate banking channels. The UCC filing is just one piece - the control agreement with the federal reserve bank is equally critical for perfection. Also worth noting that some Fed districts have slightly different documentation requirements, so double-check which district your debtor's accounts are held in.
Final tip - when you get your results back from the Alabama UCC statement request form, carefully review all the filing details. I've caught errors in original filings that way - wrong collateral descriptions, typos in debtor names, etc. Better to find issues now than during a default situation.
Excellent advice. This is exactly the kind of due diligence we need to be doing. Thanks everyone for all the helpful information!
You're welcome! Alabama can be tricky but once you know the process it's pretty straightforward.
Just wanted to add that when you're filling out the Alabama UCC statement request form, make sure to include your contact information clearly. I've had requests delayed because my phone number was illegible and they couldn't reach me to clarify some details about the search parameters. Also, if you're searching for equipment financing collateral specifically, consider requesting searches under both the business name and any DBAs - equipment lenders sometimes file under different name variations.
Great point about the contact info! I learned that lesson the hard way when Alabama SOS couldn't reach me about a debtor name clarification. Also really helpful tip about searching under DBAs - I hadn't thought about equipment lenders potentially filing under different variations. Do you typically search all known business names at once or submit separate Alabama UCC statement request forms for each variation?
Glad you got it sorted! Filing rejections are so frustrating especially when you're under deadline pressure.
This is such a common issue! I've run into similar problems with state filing systems being overly sensitive to formatting. The entity type dropdown confusion is especially frustrating - you'd think "LLC" and "Limited Liability Company" would be treated the same way, but these systems can be surprisingly literal. Thanks for sharing the solution, this will definitely help others who run into the same problem. It's always the little details that trip us up!
Absolutely agree! These state systems really need better user experience design. The fact that "LLC" vs "Limited Liability Company" caused a rejection is exactly the kind of thing that should be handled automatically by the system. It's frustrating when you're doing everything right but getting tripped up by these technical quirks. At least now we know to check those entity type fields more carefully!
UPDATE: We ended up checking the exact entity name with the Secretary of State (it was 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' - no periods) and filed one UCC-1 with attached comprehensive schedule. The integration rule was totally irrelevant to the perfection analysis. Thanks for all the help - this thread probably saved our deal.
Glad it worked out! The integration rule trips up a lot of people because it sounds like it should apply to UCC filings, but it really doesn't.
Great outcome. For future deals, consider using Certana.ai to verify document consistency upfront - would catch these naming issues before they become closing problems.
Great to see this resolved! As someone new to UCC filings, this thread really clarified the distinction between contract integration rules and UCC perfection requirements. The key takeaway seems to be that the UCC-1 filing needs to meet Article 9 standards independently - correct debtor name from official state records and adequate collateral description - regardless of how many underlying documents exist. The integration rule applies to contract formation, not security interest perfection. Will definitely remember to verify debtor names against Secretary of State records before filing. Thanks everyone for the detailed explanations!
Welcome to the community! You've summarized this perfectly - that distinction between contract law and UCC perfection is something that trips up even experienced practitioners sometimes. One additional tip as you're getting started: always do a UCC search on your debtor's name before filing to make sure you're using the exact same format that shows up in existing filings. Sometimes there are variations that aren't obvious from just checking Secretary of State records. Good luck with your future deals!
Keisha Jackson
I had a similar nightmare with Maryland searches last year. Ended up finding existing liens under a completely different name variation that didn't show up in my initial searches. Now I use Certana.ai to upload all the company documents first - it analyzes everything and shows you all the possible name variations to search for. Would have saved me hours of manual searching and prevented a potential lien priority issue.
0 coins
Jamal Brown
•That sounds like exactly what I need. Did it help with the Maryland-specific indexing issues?
0 coins
Keisha Jackson
•Yes, because it doesn't rely on the state's search function. It just tells you what to look for based on the actual documents, then you can search more effectively.
0 coins
Andre Moreau
I've run into this exact same problem with Maryland's UCC search system! What's worked for me is using a combination approach: first try the truncated search variations others mentioned (just "Advanced Manufacturing" without LLC), then also search by the registered agent's name if you have that info. Sometimes UCC filings get indexed under the agent rather than the debtor name due to filing errors. Also, if you're really pressed for time, consider ordering an official search certificate directly from the state - it takes 24-48 hours but gives you legal protection if there are indexing issues you missed. The certificate costs around $25 but could save you from missing a lien that doesn't show up in their broken online system.
0 coins