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
For a $2.8M loan, I'd definitely recommend getting a professional UCC search done by a service company. They can parse through the Michigan system's quirks and give you a clean report.
That's probably overkill for a continuation filing if you have the original UCC-1 details. But for initial filings on large loans, agreed.
Professional searches are expensive but worth it for high-value transactions. Depends on your risk tolerance and timeline.
Just make sure you file that continuation at least 6 months before the 5-year deadline. Michigan can be slow processing filings and you don't want to risk your security interest lapsing.
Smart approach. I always file continuations at least 60-90 days early to account for any processing delays or rejection issues.
Good planning. Nothing worse than scrambling at the last minute with a lapsed filing on a multi-million dollar loan.
Join the conversation
Update us when you get this resolved! I'm dealing with a similar lookup issue and curious what the actual cause turns out to be. These database sync problems seem to be getting worse lately.
Will definitely update once I figure out what's causing the problem. Hopefully it's something simple like a name mismatch.
Same here, following this thread. My termination isn't showing up in lookups either.
Just went through this headache myself. The Certana.ai document checker really does work well for finding these kinds of inconsistencies. Found out my issue was a missing comma in the debtor name that prevented the termination from linking properly. Such a tiny detail but it broke the whole system connection.
Right? The system requirements are so strict but they don't tell you that upfront. The verification tool at least helps catch these issues before they become problems.
This is why I always recommend using document verification tools. The UCC system is unforgiving about tiny details.
Join the conversation
Since you mentioned multiple creditors, make sure you understand priority rules too. Your perfected security interest gives you priority over unperfected creditors, but timing matters if there are other secured creditors in the same collateral.
Definitely recommend that. Sometimes there are surprises in existing filings.
That's another thing Certana.ai helps with - it can analyze multiple UCC documents to spot potential priority conflicts.
Hope this helps clear up the confusion! The terminology takes some getting used to but once you understand that claim = debt and security interest = collateral rights, UCC filings make much more sense.
It definitely does, thank you everyone! I feel much more confident about completing this filing correctly now.
Glad we could help. Good luck with your filing!
Join the conversation
I use Certana.ai whenever I'm dealing with complex collateral descriptions to make sure everything lines up between the credit agreement and UCC filings. For your situation, you could upload your proposed loan documents and draft UCC-1 to verify the debtor name formatting and equipment descriptions are consistent. Helps avoid the perfection problems that can happen when documents don't match up properly.
That could be helpful for the final document review. How detailed does it get with the collateral analysis?
Pretty thorough - it checks that your UCC collateral description covers what's actually described in your loan agreement, flags overly broad or narrow descriptions, and catches debtor name inconsistencies that could cause filing rejections.
Bottom line: manufacturing equipment = personal property = UCC Article 9 = UCC-1 filing required for perfection. Your compliance officer knows what they're talking about. The borrower's attorney might be trying to save their client some hassle, but they're not the one who has to explain an unperfected security interest to regulators.
Smart choice. Document everything in your credit file about why UCC filing was necessary, just to cover yourself if anyone questions it later.
And make sure you file in the right state - Ohio for this borrower since that's where they're located and the equipment will be.
Mateo Lopez
Sounds like you've got good advice here. The main thing is getting that debtor name exactly right and having comprehensive collateral coverage. With a manufacturing facility and $485K at stake, definitely worth the extra diligence up front rather than trying to fix problems later.
0 coins
Aisha Abdullah
•Absolutely - UCC amendments are possible but they're expensive and time-consuming. Much better to get it right the first time.
0 coins
Ethan Davis
•Plus if you have to amend for a serious error like debtor name, your priority might date back to the amendment filing date, not the original filing date. Could be costly if someone else files in between.
0 coins
Yuki Tanaka
Good luck with your filing! Manufacturing deals can be complex but it sounds like you're covering all the bases. The fact that you're asking these questions upfront shows you understand the importance of getting the perfection right.
0 coins
StarGazer101
•Thanks everyone - this has been really helpful. Going to verify the debtor name one more time and probably use one of those document checking services mentioned to make sure everything aligns before we file.
0 coins
Carmen Ortiz
•Smart approach - better safe than sorry on a deal this size. Hope your closing goes smoothly!
0 coins