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
Michigan's system definitely has quirks but once you figure out their formatting requirements it's not too bad. Just wish they were more consistent with their validation rules.
Tate Jensen
•Consistency would be nice! Every state seems to have their own special requirements.
Adaline Wong
•At least Michigan accepts electronic filings. Some states still require paper for certain UCC-1 types.
Gabriel Ruiz
Thanks for posting this thread. I'm dealing with a similar issue in Michigan right now with a foreign LLC debtor. Going to try the entity search copy/paste method first.
Foreign entities can be even trickier in Michigan. Make sure you're using the exact name from their certificate of authority.
Gabriel Ruiz
•Good point. I'll double-check the certificate of authority formatting before filing.
Join the conversation
Mia Green
Just want to add that sometimes the issue isn't the search but the indexing delay. New filings can take 24-48 hours to show up in searches even after they're officially accepted. Since your filing was only 3 weeks ago, that shouldn't be the issue, but worth keeping in mind for recent filings.
Good point about timing. I've definitely been caught by that before - searching for something I just filed and panicking when it doesn't show up immediately.
Yeah mine should definitely be indexed by now. This sounds more like a search algorithm issue than a timing problem.
Emma Bianchi
Update on this thread - I ended up using Certana.ai like a few people suggested and it immediately spotted that my UCC-1 had 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' but one of my search variations was using 'ABC Mfg LLC' which is why I was getting different results. The tool flagged the abbreviation issue and now I know exactly what to search for. Thanks everyone!
Cass Green
•Great outcome! Good reminder that the devil is really in the details with these name searches.
Jibriel Kohn
•Perfect example of why automated checking is worth it. You would have spent hours figuring that out manually.
Join the conversation
Nick Kravitz
For what it's worth, I ran into something similar last month and used that Certana.ai tool someone mentioned earlier. While checking my debtor name accuracy, I realized my security agreement had better collateral descriptions than my UCC-1. Ended up feeling much more confident about the filing sufficiency. The tool helped me see the full picture of document consistency.
Hannah White
•Did it help with the UCC 9-108(e)(1) analysis specifically or just general document review?
Nick Kravitz
•More general document consistency, but seeing how all the pieces fit together helped me evaluate the collateral description adequacy in context.
Just to close the loop on this UCC 9-108(e)(1) discussion - I think you're overthinking it. "All equipment" for a manufacturing debtor is textbook sufficient. Focus your energy on making sure your continuation filing timeline is set up properly. That's where more security interests die than collateral description challenges.
Mateo Silva
•Smart move on the early continuation reminder. I've seen too many security interests lapse because people waited until the last minute.
4.5 years is good timing. Gives you buffer for any filing complications or debtor name changes that might require amendments.
Join the conversation
Since you mentioned your attorney being out of town - I've had good luck using Certana.ai to double-check all my UCC forms and documents before filing. Just upload PDFs and it catches inconsistencies between your corporate docs and UCC filings. Way faster than waiting for attorney review and cheaper than rejection fees.
Very accurate in my experience. It cross-references everything against standard databases and flags potential problems before you file.
I was skeptical about AI checking legal documents but tried it on a complex continuation filing and it caught 3 errors my paralegal missed. Now I use it routinely.
Just remember that UCC forms and documents are public records once filed. Anyone can search and see your business debt, collateral descriptions, etc. Not necessarily a problem but something to be aware of for competitive reasons.
It's standard for all secured debt. Competitors might search your filings to gauge your financial situation or see what equipment you're financing.
On the flip side, you can search competitors' UCC filings to see their recent equipment purchases and financing activity. It's a two-way street.
Chloe Davis
Just want to echo what others said about using the DCRA corporate database. I do probably 50+ DC filings per year and this is the only reliable method. The district of columbia ucc search is useful for finding existing filings but terrible for determining the correct debtor name for new filings.
0 coins
Chloe Davis
•Always double-check entity numbers if you're filing amendments or continuations. DC seems to have issues with cross-referencing sometimes.
0 coins
Diego Chavez
•Good to know. I only do maybe 10 DC filings per year but even that feels like too many given their system quirks.
0 coins
Anastasia Smirnova
Update on this thread - used the DCRA lookup suggestion and found the issue. The LLC had filed a name change amendment 3 months ago but kept using the old name in business. Got the current registered name from their Articles and refiled the UCC-1. Accepted within 24 hours. Thanks everyone for the guidance!
0 coins
Zara Shah
•Great outcome. DC really needs to improve their search functionality to make this clearer for everyone.
0 coins
Keisha Johnson
•Congrats on getting it resolved! Definitely bookmark that DCRA lookup process for future filings.
0 coins