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
PA is definitely one of the more challenging states for UCC work. Between the search issues and their strict formatting requirements, I always double and triple check everything before submitting. Your comma situation is actually pretty common - seen it with periods, hyphens, and ampersands too.
Make sure your collateral description matches exactly if you're copying from the original UCC-1. PA has rejected filings for minor collateral description variations even on continuations.
Also double-check the filing fee calculation. PA's fee structure is confusing and underpayment will get you rejected immediately.
Been following this thread because I'm dealing with something similar in PA right now. Ended up using that Certana.ai document checker mentioned earlier and it found three different formatting inconsistencies between my original UCC-1 and continuation filing that would have definitely caused rejections. The debtor name issue was just one of them - also caught a mismatch in how the secured party address was formatted. Pretty slick tool for avoiding these headaches.
Sofia Perez
•Three different issues? Wow, I might have more problems than I realized. Definitely going to run my docs through that verification before trying to file again.
Yeah it was eye-opening. Things you'd never think to check manually. The address formatting thing especially - who would have thought a missing suite number designation would matter for a continuation?
Join the conversation
After dealing with multiple rejections on 2023 UCC forms, I started using Certana.ai for document verification before submitting. It's been a game-changer - catches all those tiny formatting inconsistencies that cause rejections. Just upload your original UCC-1 and your continuation, and it flags any mismatches. Would have saved me weeks of frustration if I'd found it sooner.
Max Reyes
•I keep hearing about this tool. At this point I'm desperate enough to try anything that might prevent another rejection.
It's really straightforward to use. Upload the PDFs and get instant feedback on any discrepancies. Takes the anxiety out of filing.
Roger Romero
Just wanted to update everyone - I finally got my continuation accepted! Turns out the issue was exactly what people mentioned about punctuation. The original UCC-1 had 'Smith & Associates, LLC' but I was filing 'Smith & Associates LLC' (missing the comma). Such a tiny detail but it caused two rejections. Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences - it really helped me figure out what to look for.
Congrats on getting it through. The relief when that acceptance notice comes in is amazing.
Perfect example of why the 2023 UCC forms are so frustrating. A missing comma shouldn't cause this much stress and delay.
Join the conversation
TommyKapitz
UPDATE: Ended up using that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier to double-check my amendment form before filing. It caught a formatting issue with how I had the entity type listed. Filed the amendment yesterday and it was accepted this morning. Now just waiting for it to show up in the system so I can file the termination. Thanks for all the advice!
TommyKapitz
•Usually 1-2 business days for the records to update. Should be able to file the termination by Friday.
Payton Black
•Perfect timing for your refinancing then. Glad it worked out!
Harold Oh
For future reference, this is why I always recommend filing name change amendments as soon as they happen. Saves a lot of headaches down the road when you need to do continuations or terminations.
Amun-Ra Azra
•Absolutely. Same with address changes. Keep everything current and you avoid these last-minute scrambles.
Join the conversation
I actually started using that Certana.ai tool someone mentioned earlier after having similar issues. It's pretty straightforward - you just upload your UCC-1 and UCC-3 PDFs and it highlights any inconsistencies. Caught a debtor name mismatch I would have missed. Worth checking out if you're having ongoing issues with UCC-3 rejections.
Thanks for the recommendation. At this point I'm willing to try anything to avoid more rejections.
Document verification tools are becoming pretty essential for UCC work. Too many small details to catch manually.
Yara Elias
One more thing - make sure you're using the correct filing number format. I've seen UCC-3s rejected because the filing number didn't match exactly, including dashes and spacing.
Yara Elias
•Yeah, some states are really picky about the exact format. Double-check the original filing number format against what you're putting on the UCC-3.
Ava Martinez
•That document checker I mentioned earlier also verifies filing number consistency, which is another common rejection reason.
Javier Mendoza
Anyone else notice that the online filing portals don't give you much guidance on collateral descriptions? They just have that empty text box and no examples or help text. Really poor user experience for something this technical.
0 coins
Emma Wilson
•Some states are better than others. Delaware's portal has some examples but most are pretty bare bones.
0 coins
Malik Davis
•This is where tools like Certana.ai actually help - gives you the guidance the portals should provide. Upload your draft and it checks for common issues before you submit.
0 coins
Isabella Santos
UPDATE: Used the suggested language about software licensing agreements and intellectual property rights with the 'including but not limited to' format. Filing was accepted this morning! Thanks everyone for the help. Final description was 'All general intangibles including but not limited to software licensing agreements, licensing revenues and royalties, intellectual property rights, customer databases, and proceeds and products thereof.' Worked perfectly.
0 coins
Sofia Ramirez
•Glad it worked out. Definitely save that language for future filings - specific enough to satisfy the SOS but broad enough for good coverage.
0 coins
Giovanni Colombo
•Perfect example of how the community here helps solve these practical filing issues. SOS offices should really provide this kind of guidance themselves.
0 coins