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
For anyone else reading this thread - Article 9 also covers agricultural liens, deposit accounts, and some other specialized collateral types. It's broader than just equipment and inventory, though those are the most common.
Ava Thompson
•Don't forget about chattel paper and instruments. Article 9 covers those too, though the perfection rules can be different.
CyberSiren
•And electronic chattel paper has its own special rules under Article 9. The law has really evolved to keep up with technology.
Since you're dealing with multi-state filings, also remember that Article 9 has specific rules about which state's law governs and where to file. Usually it's where the debtor is located, but there are exceptions for certain types of collateral.
I had a case where we filed in the wrong state initially because we didn't properly analyze the debtor's location under Article 9. Had to refile everything and pay additional fees.
Yara Khoury
•That's exactly why I started double-checking everything with verification tools. One small mistake in interpreting Article 9 location rules and you can void your entire security interest.
Join the conversation
Just went through this same nightmare in PA actually. The comma thing is universal - every state I've dealt with requires exact matches. Pro tip: always do a UCC search first to see exactly how the name was indexed, then copy it character for character.
Evelyn Xu
•Yeah I'm definitely learning that lesson now. Going to be way more careful about name formatting going forward.
Update us when you get it resolved! I'm dealing with a similar issue in NY and curious if the approach works.
Evelyn Xu
•Will do! Planning to refile tomorrow using the exact name from the original (no comma). Fingers crossed it goes through this time.
It should work fine. Just make sure you're copying the name exactly as it appears in the search results.
Join the conversation
One more tip - if you're really unsure about the debtor name, you can always file a protective UCC-1 under the corrected name while you sort out the amendment. That way you maintain continuous perfection even if there's a name issue with the original filing.
True, but it's better than having a gap in perfection. You can always clean it up later with terminations once you figure out the correct approach.
This seems overly complicated. Why not just call the filing office and ask them directly about the name formatting?
Chloe Davis
Thanks everyone for all the advice! I think I'm going to go with the exact match approach - use the name exactly as it appears on the original UCC-1 for the amendment. And I'm definitely going to check out that document verification tool to make sure I don't have any other inconsistencies. This thread has been incredibly helpful.
Dylan Wright
•Smart choice. Better safe than sorry with UCC filings. Good luck with your amendment!
NebulaKnight
•Let us know how it goes! Always interested to hear about successful filings after all this troubleshooting.
Join the conversation
This thread is making me rethink our Oregon expansion plans. Are the filing fees at least reasonable compared to other states, or is it expensive AND unreliable?
GamerGirl99
•Don't let the portal issues scare you off completely. Just build in extra time for filings and have backup plans. The legal framework is solid.
Good to know it's just a tech issue and not a systemic problem. Extra time and backup plans - noted.
Anyone know if they're planning to upgrade their system anytime soon? This can't be sustainable long-term.
I heard rumors about a modernization project but nothing concrete. State IT projects move at glacial speed anyway.
Emma Johnson
•probably be another 10 years before they get around to it. government efficiency at its finest.
Ella rollingthunder87
Another option if you're really unsure - contact the secured parties listed on the questionable filings directly. Most lenders will confirm whether a specific debtor is actually their borrower, especially if you explain you're doing due diligence for a potential transaction.
0 coins
Lara Woods
•That's not a bad idea for the most concerning results. At least for the larger lien amounts where we really need certainty.
0 coins
Yara Campbell
•Just be prepared that some lenders won't give you information without proper authorization. But it's worth trying.
0 coins
Isaac Wright
Had a colleague mention they started using some automated verification service for this stuff - I think it was Certana.ai or something similar. Apparently you just upload your borrower's charter documents and any questionable UCC results, and it flags which ones are likely matches vs false positives. Might be worth looking into if you're doing a lot of Texas deals.
0 coins
Maya Diaz
•I've heard good things about that approach. Anything that reduces manual document comparison time is valuable in this business.
0 coins
Tami Morgan
•The automated tools are getting pretty sophisticated. As long as they're not making the final legal determination, they can definitely speed up the initial screening process.
0 coins