UCC Document Community

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 :)

Liam Fitzgerald

UCC 1-308 with signature causing filing rejection - need help

I've been dealing with a nightmare scenario where my UCC-1 filing keeps getting rejected by the Secretary of State office. The issue seems to be related to including 'UCC 1-308 with signature' notation on the form. I'm financing some manufacturing equipment for a client and need to get this perfected ASAP since we're approaching the 20-day grace period deadline. Has anyone successfully filed a UCC-1 with UCC 1-308 notation without getting rejected? The SOS portal error message just says 'invalid signature format' but doesn't specify what exactly is wrong. This is holding up a $180K equipment loan and I'm running out of time. Any guidance would be appreciated.

Quick update - filed again with clean signatures matching debtor names exactly and it went through immediately. Thanks everyone for the clarification about UCC 1-308 not belonging on financing statements. Lesson learned!

0 coins

Javier Torres

•

Awesome! Nothing like getting that acceptance confirmation after dealing with rejections.

0 coins

Emma Davis

•

Great outcome. Now you know for next time - keep UCC-1 filings clean and simple.

0 coins

Malik Johnson

•

Worth mentioning for anyone else reading this - if you're doing amendments or continuations later, same rules apply. No extra notations in signature fields, just match the original filing format exactly.

0 coins

Ravi Sharma

•

And remember continuation deadlines! File within 6 months before the 5-year expiration or you lose perfection.

0 coins

NebulaNomad

•

That's where document checking tools like Certana really help - they can verify your continuation matches the original filing perfectly.

0 coins

Levi Parker

UCC-1 addendum causing rejection - collateral description overflow issue

Running into a wall here with our equipment financing UCC-1 that keeps getting rejected by the SOS office. The collateral description is too long for the main form and we need to use an addendum but apparently we're doing something wrong with the formatting. This is for a $2.8M construction equipment lease and we can't afford to have the lien unperfected due to a paperwork screwup. The debtor name matches exactly but the rejection notice mentions something about the addendum not being properly referenced on the main UCC-1 form. Has anyone dealt with collateral descriptions that require a UCC-1 addendum? The equipment list is extensive (excavators, bulldozers, compactors, etc.) and there's no way it fits in the standard collateral field. Really need to get this filed correctly before our internal deadline.

For what it's worth, I've had success with Certana.ai's UCC checker on addendum filings too. It caught an issue where our main form didn't properly cross-reference the addendum pages. Saved us from another rejection cycle.

0 coins

Levi Parker

•

Seems like multiple people have had good experiences with that service. Might be worth trying for peace of mind.

0 coins

Aaron Boston

•

Yeah, especially for complex filings like this where there are multiple documents that need to align perfectly.

0 coins

Eva St. Cyr

•

UPDATE: Fixed the issue! It was exactly what several people mentioned - we needed more specific language in the main form referencing the addendum. Used the wording someone suggested about 'incorporated herein by reference' and also made sure the addendum checkbox was marked. Filed this morning and got acceptance confirmation within 2 hours. Thanks everyone for the help!

0 coins

Awesome! Those quick acceptance confirmations are such a relief when you're dealing with tight deadlines.

0 coins

Chloe Zhang

•

Finally a success story! Nice to know the system actually works when you get all the details right.

0 coins

Isabella Ferreira

Colorado UCC forms portal keeps rejecting my filing - name format issues?

I'm dealing with a frustrating situation with Colorado UCC forms and their online filing system. Been trying to file a UCC-1 for equipment financing on a construction project and the portal keeps spitting back rejections. The debtor name on our loan docs shows 'Rocky Mountain Construction LLC' but I'm getting error messages about name format requirements. Has anyone dealt with Colorado's specific requirements for LLC designations in debtor names? This is holding up a $180K equipment loan and I'm running out of time before the security agreement expires. The collateral description seems fine (excavator, serial numbers all match) but something about how Colorado UCC forms handle entity names is tripping me up. Any insights on their particular quirks with business entity suffixes?

Yuki Sato

•

For future reference, I always run a UCC search on the debtor name before filing to make sure I have it exactly right. Colorado's search function will show you how other filers have successfully formatted the name.

0 coins

Carmen Flores

•

That's really smart! Never thought to do a search first to see the correct formatting. Great tip.

0 coins

Andre Dubois

•

This is brilliant advice. The search results basically give you a template for how to format the name correctly.

0 coins

CyberSamurai

•

Update: Fixed the comma issue (had to use 'Rocky Mountain Construction, LLC' exactly as registered) and the filing went through perfectly! Thanks everyone for the help. Colorado UCC forms can be finicky but getting the entity name exactly right is definitely the key.

0 coins

Jamal Carter

•

Congrats on getting it through! That's such a relief when you're dealing with loan deadlines. Definitely saving this thread for future reference.

0 coins

Mei Liu

•

Great outcome! For anyone else dealing with similar issues, Certana.ai's document verification really helps catch these formatting problems before you submit. Worth checking out if you do a lot of UCC filings.

0 coins

Isabella Brown

Mississippi UCC search turning up confusing results - need help interpreting records

I'm doing due diligence on a equipment purchase and ran a Mississippi UCC search on the seller. The results are showing multiple filings but I can't tell which ones are still active vs terminated. Some have continuation dates, others show amendment info, and there's one that looks like it might be a partial release but I'm not sure. The debtor name variations are also throwing me off - same company but slightly different spellings across different UCC-1 filings. Is there a way to definitively determine which liens are still perfected? I need to know if I'm buying equipment that's already pledged as collateral. This is my first time doing this level of search and the SOS database isn't exactly user-friendly with explanations.

Jordan Walker

•

Don't forget to search under any parent companies or subsidiaries too. Sometimes the liens are filed against the parent company but cover assets owned by subsidiaries.

0 coins

Good point. I'll need to research the corporate structure to make sure I'm not missing anything.

0 coins

Natalie Adams

•

Also check for any 'all assets' or 'all personal property' language in the collateral descriptions. That could potentially cover equipment even if it's not specifically listed.

0 coins

Bottom line - if you're not 100% confident in your interpretation of the search results, get professional help before you close on the purchase. Better to spend a little money upfront than deal with lien complications later.

0 coins

You're absolutely right. I'd rather be safe than sorry on something this size.

0 coins

Amara Torres

•

Agreed. And make sure your purchase agreement includes representations and warranties from the seller about clear title and no existing liens.

0 coins

ThunderBolt7

LexisNexis UCC filings search showing outdated terminations - help needed

Been using LexisNexis UCC filings database for due diligence on potential borrowers and running into some weird inconsistencies. Found several cases where LexisNexis shows UCC-3 terminations that were supposedly filed 6+ months ago, but when I cross-reference directly with the Secretary of State portal, those same filings show as 'pending' or sometimes don't appear at all. This is creating major headaches for our loan approval process since we can't rely on what should be authoritative data. Has anyone else noticed LexisNexis UCC filings search results not syncing properly with actual state records? We're talking about deals worth $2M+ where lien position accuracy is absolutely critical. The discrepancies seem most common with Illinois and Texas filings, but I'm seeing scattered issues in other states too. Really need to know if this is a known issue or if there's something I'm missing in my search methodology.

QuantumLeap

•

I've started using a combination approach - LexisNexis for initial screening, then Certana.ai to verify document consistency when I find anything questionable, then direct state verification for final confirmation on large deals. It's more work but catches way more issues than relying on any single source.

0 coins

QuantumLeap

•

True, but for anything over $1M it's worth the extra effort. One missed lien can cost more than the verification process for dozens of loans.

0 coins

Risk management 101 right there.

0 coins

Ravi Sharma

•

Bottom line is that LexisNexis UCC filings are a starting point, not an ending point. The official state records are always the final authority, and until commercial databases can guarantee real-time accuracy, we're stuck with this verification process. At least now there are tools like document checkers that can help catch discrepancies faster than manual comparison.

0 coins

Omar Hassan

•

Hopefully the states will eventually standardize their data feeds, but I'm not holding my breath.

0 coins

ThunderBolt7

•

Thanks everyone for the insights. Sounds like dual verification is the way to go for now, and I'll definitely look into that document checking tool for catching discrepancies faster.

0 coins

Prev1...481482483484485...684Next