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
Just went through something similar with a client last month. Filed UCC-3 amendment first to standardize the debtor name, then the continuation went through without any issues. Took about a week total but gave everyone peace of mind.
That's reassuring to hear. A week timeline works with my deadline. Did you file both documents simultaneously or wait for the amendment to be accepted first?
I waited for the amendment to be accepted first, then filed the continuation. Wanted to make sure the corrected name was in the system before trying the continuation again.
For what it's worth, most Secretary of State offices are pretty good about processing amendments quickly, especially when it's obviously the same entity (like 1ST vs FIRST). The key is making sure your amendment form clearly explains the correction and references the original filing number correctly.
Smart plan. And double-check that filing number - one wrong digit and you'll have a whole new set of problems.
This is exactly why I always triple-check filing numbers. One transposition error can create a nightmare.
Join the conversation
The whole UCC system exists because of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which standardized secured transactions across states. Before this, every state had different rules and it was chaos for interstate commerce. Now there's consistency in how security interests are created, perfected, and enforced.
Interesting history but I still don't understand the practical impact on my business loan.
In practical terms, it means your lender can rely on a predictable legal framework to secure their loan with your equipment. This standardization makes credit more available and affordable because lenders face less uncertainty about their rights.
Don't forget about termination statements when loans are paid off. The UCC-3 termination needs to be filed to clear the public record, otherwise it looks like you still owe the debt. Most lenders handle this automatically but it's worth confirming the termination was actually filed.
Search the UCC database using your business name. The original UCC-1 should show as terminated if everything was done properly. If not, contact your former lender to file the termination statement.
This is exactly why document verification tools are so valuable. Instead of manually checking multiple databases, you can upload your loan documents and UCC forms to verify everything aligns properly. Saves hours of research time.
Join the conversation
One more tip - when you refile, make sure you're using the most current version of the state's UCC1 form. Sometimes rejections happen because you're using an outdated form version, especially if you downloaded it months ago.
Good catch! I've been using the same form template for several filings. Better check for updates.
The forms get updated more often than you'd think. Always grab a fresh copy from the SOS website.
Following this thread because I have a similar filing coming up next month. Really helpful to see all the potential pitfalls before I make the same mistakes.
Smart to research first! These UCC1 issues are so preventable if you know what to watch out for.
Exactly. Better to learn from other people's mistakes than make them myself.
Join the conversation
Look, the bottom line is your UCC-1 establishes your security interest in the collateral. The inspection rights come from the UCC itself when contracts are silent. Your lien isn't going anywhere because of inspection clause wording. Tell the debtor's attorney to cite the specific UCC section that supports their argument - bet they can't.
Exactly. Most of these challenges fall apart when you ask for actual citations and precedent.
This is why I love working with lenders who understand UCC law. Makes it so much easier to call out frivolous challenges.
Final thought - if you're still worried, consider getting a UCC opinion letter from qualified counsel. Will cost a few thousand but gives you definitive protection against these kinds of challenges. Sometimes worth it for peace of mind on larger deals.
Not a bad idea for future deals. This one probably doesn't justify the expense but good to know the option exists.
Yeah, depends on deal size and risk tolerance. But can definitely shut down debtor attorney fishing expeditions.
Yuki Tanaka
Been there done that with priority disputes. UCC 9-320 is one of those sections that seems straightforward until you're in the middle of a fight about it. Document everything - loan proceeds, purchase dates, filing dates. The bankruptcy trustee will scrutinize every detail.
0 coins
Esmeralda Gómez
•For future deals, consider using automated verification tools. I started using Certana.ai after a similar situation and it catches document inconsistencies that could affect priority claims.
0 coins
Yuki Tanaka
•Good advice. These priority disputes are expensive to litigate, so prevention is worth the investment.
0 coins
Klaus Schmidt
Update: talked to our bankruptcy attorney and she confirmed the PMSI issue is the main problem. Since our loan proceeds didn't directly purchase the collateral we're claiming, we're probably just a regular secured creditor. Still fighting it but not optimistic about our priority position.
0 coins
Jamal Brown
•That's unfortunate but not surprising. PMSI rules are pretty strict about the proceeds going directly to acquire the collateral.
0 coins
Aisha Patel
•At least you know where you stand now. Better to find out during the case than after a judgment against you.
0 coins