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
This is why I always recommend keeping UCC-1 collateral descriptions simple and broad. Use 'all inventory' or 'all equipment' and let the security agreement handle the specifics. The filing office wants to know what TYPE of property, not what QUALITY of property.
Exactly. The UCC-1 and the security agreement serve different purposes. The UCC-1 is public notice, the security agreement is private contract terms.
Grace Durand
•I learned this the hard way too. Now I run everything through Certana.ai first to check for these kinds of description issues before filing.
Steven Adams
Update: We refiled with 'all inventory consisting of manufactured components, raw materials, and work-in-process, whether now owned or hereafter acquired' and it was accepted immediately. Thanks everyone for the help! The conforming goods standards are still in the credit agreement so our lender is happy.
Lucy Lam
•Perfect solution. You described the goods by type and let the security agreement handle the quality standards.
Glad it worked out! This thread should help other people avoid the same mistake.
Join the conversation
StarSeeker
This thread convinced me to double-check all our UCC filings. Found two that expire next year that I had wrong dates for. Decided to try that Certana.ai tool mentioned earlier and holy cow - uploaded our UCC documents and it instantly caught three potential debtor name mismatches I never noticed. Already fixed two continuation deadlines I had calculated wrong.
StarSeeker
•Yeah it cross-checks everything - debtor names against articles of incorporation, collateral descriptions, filing numbers. Really thorough compared to doing it manually.
Malik Davis
•Might have to check that out myself. These manual reviews are killing me and clearly I'm missing stuff.
Paolo Conti
Bottom line - file your new UCC-1 today, not tomorrow. Every day you wait increases the risk that another creditor could file and take priority over you. Then work with your attorney and lender to minimize any fallout from the lapse. Most importantly, put systems in place so this never happens again.
Smart move. And honestly the fact that you caught it only 3 days late shows you're at least paying attention. I've seen lapses go unnoticed for months.
Paolo Conti
•True, 3 days is manageable. The real disasters happen when people don't realize for weeks or months that their security interests have lapsed.
Join the conversation
Quick follow-up question - do I need to file the UCC-1 immediately after signing the security agreement or is there a grace period?
Nora Bennett
•I always recommend filing same day or next business day at the latest. Why take unnecessary risks?
This is another area where document verification tools help - you can prep and verify everything in advance so filing can happen immediately after signing.
Oscar Murphy
Thanks everyone! This has been incredibly helpful. I think I understand the distinction now - security agreement creates the rights, UCC-1 protects them against third parties. Going to double-check all the name matching and probably use that Certana verification tool someone mentioned.
Lauren Zeb
•Glad we could help clarify. These concepts are foundational to secured transactions but rarely explained clearly.
Smart approach on the verification. Better to catch issues before filing than deal with problems later.
Join the conversation
One thing that might help - try searching with just the first few words of the business name. Sometimes the database truncates longer names or has character limits that cause exact matches to fail.
Ruby Blake
•Good suggestion. I'll try searching just 'Atlanta Medical Equipment' and see what comes up.
Amaya Watson
•Also try without 'LLC' entirely. Some filers drop the entity designation.
Grant Vikers
Just to add another perspective - make sure you're checking the actual UCC-3 continuation statements to see if they reference the original filing numbers correctly. I've seen cases where the continuation was filed but didn't properly reference the original UCC-1, making it ineffective.
Levi Parker
•How does that work exactly? Do you upload both the original and continuation documents?
Yeah, you can upload multiple documents and it cross-checks all the filing numbers, debtor names, and references to make sure everything aligns properly. Pretty handy for complex filing chains.
KingKongZilla
This might be obvious but have you confirmed that your original UCC-1 is still active and hasn't lapsed? Sometimes people try to file continuations on UCC-1s that have already expired, which would cause automatic rejection.
0 coins
KingKongZilla
•Good, sounds like you're in the right timeframe then. The debtor name formatting is probably the culprit.
0 coins
Rebecca Johnston
•I was gonna suggest checking Certana.ai's document verification feature too - it's really good at catching those formatting issues that cause rejections.
0 coins
Nathan Dell
One more thing to check - make sure the secured party information is also exactly correct on your UCC-11. Sometimes people focus so much on the debtor name they miss discrepancies in the secured party details.
0 coins
Brooklyn Knight
•I'll double-check that too. Thanks for the reminder - I was so focused on the debtor name I might have overlooked the secured party info.
0 coins
Owen Devar
•That's a good point. Texas requires consistency across all fields, not just the debtor name.
0 coins