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
Eli Wang
The frustrating thing about UCC 1-201 debtor name issues is that they're not caught until after you file and pay the fees. Then you're out the money and back to square one. Really wish the filing systems had better real-time validation.
This is why I always double-check everything before submitting. But even then, subtle formatting differences can slip through.
We started using document verification tools specifically for this reason. Upload your charter and UCC-1 draft, get instant feedback on name consistency. Much better than finding out after rejection.
Quick update - found the issue! There was a 2019 amendment that changed the name from 'Advanced Manufacturing Solutions LLC' to 'Advanced Manufacturing Solutions, LLC' - added a comma. UCC 1-201 strikes again with punctuation precision.
Lola Perez
•This is exactly why document verification is so important. Those tiny changes are impossible to catch manually but kill your filing.
Madison King
•Thanks everyone for the help! Filing the corrected UCC-1 now with the proper comma. Lesson learned about checking for charter amendments.
Join the conversation
Just went through this exact situation with an Arkansas continuation last month. Found multiple name variations in the search but used Certana.ai to verify my documents matched exactly. Turned out the original UCC-1 had a specific spacing that wasn't showing correctly in the search results. The verification caught it and my continuation was accepted without issues.
That's exactly the kind of detail that's easy to miss but will cause a rejection. Good catch.
Yara Assad
•Spacing issues are so frustrating but they really do matter for these filings. Glad you caught it before submitting.
Olivia Clark
Make sure you're not looking at amended or terminated filings in your search results. Sometimes old filings with similar names stay in the database even after they're no longer active. Focus on finding your specific 2020 UCC-1 and use that name format for the continuation.
KylieRose
•Thanks everyone. I think I've identified the correct original filing now. Going to double-check the debtor name format and file the continuation this week.
Smart move filing it soon rather than waiting until the last minute. Gives you time to fix any issues if something gets rejected.
Join the conversation
Romeo Quest
One more validation point - I used to work in a bank's loan operations department and we saw UCC 1-308 notations regularly. Never once did it affect our continuation filing procedures or create any issues with our security interests. It's just borrower paranoia that doesn't translate to UCC filing complications.
Val Rossi
•Great insight from someone who dealt with this professionally. That's exactly the kind of real-world experience that puts these concerns in perspective.
Eve Freeman
For what it's worth, I had a debtor challenge a continuation filing once claiming their UCC 1-308 notation invalidated our security interest. The judge basically laughed it out of court. The notation has no bearing on properly perfected UCC filings. Your continuation will be fine if you follow standard procedures.
Caden Turner
•Did the judge explain why the notation was irrelevant?
Eve Freeman
•Judge said UCC 1-308 relates to contract interpretation, not perfection of security interests. Two completely different areas of law.
Join the conversation
Following this thread because I'm dealing with something similar in Minnesota. Different state but same basic challenge with entity name consistency across multiple UCC filings.
Ravi Patel
•Minnesota has its own quirks with debtor names. Definitely worth checking their specific requirements and search procedures.
Each state handles these things differently. What works in ND might not apply in MN, unfortunately.
Omar Zaki
Thanks for posting this - really helpful discussion. I'll definitely be more careful about debtor name verification going forward. Seems like there are good tools and procedures available if you know where to look.
The key is being systematic about it. Don't just assume - verify everything through multiple sources.
Exactly. A little extra diligence upfront can save massive headaches later in the process.
Isabella Costa
One thing to watch out for with DCF security agreement forms is that they sometimes include after-acquired property clauses. Make sure your UCC-1 collateral description covers that if it's relevant to your deal. Something like 'all equipment now owned or hereafter acquired' language.
0 coins
Ravi Malhotra
•Good catch. After-acquired property is easy to forget but really important for ongoing business relationships.
0 coins
Giovanni Colombo
•Yes, this deal does involve some future equipment purchases so I'll make sure to include that language.
0 coins
Freya Christensen
Just to add another perspective - I've found that being too generic in the collateral description can sometimes cause problems down the road if there are disputes about what's actually covered. You want to be broad enough to avoid errors but specific enough that it's clear what you're claiming. It's a delicate balance.
0 coins
Omar Farouk
•That's a fair point. I guess it depends on the specific situation and what kind of collateral you're dealing with.
0 coins
Fatima Al-Qasimi
•I think referencing the security agreement by date strikes the right balance. It's specific enough to identify the collateral but doesn't require you to repeat all the details in the UCC filing.
0 coins