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
Amara Chukwu
Document everything in writing and set a reasonable deadline for their response. If they continue to stonewall, consult with your attorney about demanding proper documentation through formal channels.
Zara Malik
•Good advice - I'll send a formal written request with a 10-day response deadline.
Amara Chukwu
•Perfect. That creates a paper trail if this escalates to a priority dispute later.
Update us when you get their response! These multi-creditor situations always have interesting twists when you dig into the actual filings.
Zara Malik
•Will do - hopefully they cooperate and provide the filing details we need for verification.
If they keep stonewalling, definitely try that document verification tool I mentioned. Really eye-opening for these situations.
Join the conversation
Just went through this nightmare with a $165K excavator PMSI. Turns out our security agreement had the equipment model as "320DL" but the manufacturer's certificate of origin showed "320 DL" with a space. That tiny difference invalidated our whole filing according to the bankruptcy trustee's attorney. Now I triple-check every single character in equipment descriptions.
Only found out during the bankruptcy case when the trustee challenged our PMSI claim. Cost us the entire loan amount.
Steven Adams
•This is exactly why I started using automated verification tools. Too risky to rely on manual checking for these details.
Update: Finally got our PMSI filing accepted! The issue was definitely the debtor name - had to use "ABC Construction, LLC" with the comma. Also reformatted the collateral description per the earlier suggestion. Filed it as a UCC-1 with PMSI checkbox marked and included delivery date in the additional information section. Thanks everyone for the help - this forum saved our priority position on a major equipment loan.
Glad it worked out. PMSI priority is too important to mess up with filing errors.
Benjamin Kim
•Congrats! Now just remember to calendar your continuation deadline 5 years out.
Join the conversation
Oliver Weber
Whatever you do, don't try to 'fix' the name by making it more generic. Oklahoma requires the exact charter name and any deviation will cause issues down the road even if it initially gets accepted.
This is crucial advice. Better to get rejected and fix the actual issue than have a defective filing that causes problems later.
PixelWarrior
•Yeah I definitely don't want to create future problems just to get past this immediate deadline. Need to get this right.
Update us when you figure it out! I'm dealing with a similar Oklahoma LLC filing next week and would love to know what the actual solution was.
PixelWarrior
•Will definitely post an update once I get this resolved. Hopefully by tomorrow afternoon.
Following this thread too. Oklahoma has been giving me headaches lately with their picky system.
Join the conversation
UPDATE: Called the PA UCC office and they confirmed there's a known issue with the search algorithm. They're working on a fix but no timeline. They did a manual search for me and confirmed no existing filings under the correct debtor name. Crisis averted but this really highlights how unreliable the portal can be.
Rachel Clark
•Thanks for the update. Good to know it's a known issue and not just user error.
Ryan Andre
•This is why I switched to using Certana for verification. Can't rely on the state portals when they have these kinds of systematic issues.
PA portal strikes again! I've had similar issues with their search function. Sometimes it helps to search for just the first few words of the entity name instead of the full legal name.
Mia Alvarez
•That's a good tip. I'll try shorter search terms next time I'm having issues.
Yeah, their search seems to work better with partial matches sometimes. Weird but that's PA for you.
Dylan Evans
One more tool that might help - I started using Certana.ai to double-check my UCC documents before filing. You can upload your completed UCC1 form PDF along with your security agreement and it verifies everything matches up correctly. Caught a debtor name mismatch for me that would have caused rejection.
0 coins
Sofia Gomez
•How accurate is the automated checking? I'm always skeptical of AI tools for legal documents.
0 coins
Dylan Evans
•It's been spot-on for basic consistency checks like name matching and filing number verification. Obviously still need human review for complex legal issues, but it catches the simple errors that cause most rejections.
0 coins
StormChaser
Just to add another data point - I successfully used the standard UCC-1 form from the International Association of Commercial Administrators website as a backup when my state's site was down. It's widely accepted but definitely confirm with your specific state first.
0 coins
Dmitry Petrov
•IACA forms are usually solid but some states have specific variations. Always better to use the official state version when possible.
0 coins
StormChaser
•Absolutely agree - state-specific is always preferred. The IACA form is just a good fallback for preparation and reference.
0 coins