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
Been dealing with Kansas UCC searches for 15 years and they've always had formatting inconsistencies. The key is making sure your original filing is correct and keeping good documentation. The search database is just a finding tool, not the official record.
That makes sense. I was treating the search results as the authoritative source when I should be focusing on the actual filing documentation.
Exactly. The certified copy of your UCC-1 is what matters legally, not how it displays in search results.
Just went through this exact situation with a client. What worked was getting a certified copy of the original filing and including a note in our documentation explaining the search display discrepancy. The auditors had no issues with it.
That's a practical solution. Shows you're aware of the discrepancy and have the correct documentation.
I'll request the certified copy tomorrow. Thanks for the suggestion - this has been really helpful.
Join the conversation
For a loan officer, I'd focus on three key Article 9 concepts: 1) Attachment (your security interest becomes enforceable) 2) Perfection (you get priority over other creditors) 3) Priority rules (who gets paid first in bankruptcy). Master those and you'll handle 90% of your secured lending issues.
Attachment requires: signed security agreement, value given, and debtor has rights in the collateral. Usually happens at closing but can be delayed if collateral is acquired later.
And perfection is typically your UCC-1 filing, though some collateral types require possession or control instead of filing.
Just want to add that Article 9 interacts with federal law in some areas - aircraft liens under FAA regulations, ship mortgages, some intellectual property. Don't assume Article 9 always governs just because you're dealing with personal property.
Good to know. We don't do aircraft or ship financing but I could see IP issues coming up with some of our tech company borrowers.
Copyright and trademark security interests can be tricky - federal registration systems sometimes preempt Article 9 filing requirements.
Join the conversation
One more thing - security agreements don't typically include dispute resolution procedures like arbitration clauses or forum selection. Those usually go in the main loan agreement. The security agreement should focus on the collateral and the secured party's rights in that collateral.
Though some security agreements do include enforcement procedures like self-help repossession rights or notice requirements for Article 9 sales.
True, but those are specifically about exercising rights in the collateral after default. Different from general contract dispute resolution.
Thanks everyone, this really helps clarify the boundaries. It sounds like the main things NOT in security agreements are: UCC filing administrative details, loan payment terms, other creditor information, regulatory compliance matters, and general contract dispute procedures. The security agreement should focus on creating the security interest, describing collateral, and defining secured party rights in that collateral.
Exactly. Document consistency is crucial for perfection. I'd recommend using automated verification tools like Certana.ai mentioned earlier to catch discrepancies before they become problems.
Perfect, I'll use this to build our compliance checklist. Really appreciate everyone's input on this!
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, I tried that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier and it's actually pretty slick. Uploaded my charter doc and UCC draft and it highlighted exactly where the punctuation didn't match. Saved me from a potential filing rejection.
Glad it worked for you too! It's become part of my standard workflow for any UCC filing now.
Might have to check that out. Sounds like it could prevent exactly the kind of issue I'm worried about.
Bottom line - when in doubt, use the exact name from the most recent state filing. NY doesn't mess around with UCC rejections and you don't want to explain to your client why their security interest might not be perfected because of a punctuation mark.
This is why I always pull fresh entity docs right before filing, even if I have older versions. Things change.
Thanks everyone - consensus seems clear. Going with the charter name exactly as filed with NY. Appreciate all the practical advice!
Lydia Santiago
I'd also recommend setting up a regular monitoring schedule to check your filings periodically. Caught a similar issue 6 months after filing once - thankfully it was just cosmetic but could have been worse. Now I check all my active filings quarterly.
0 coins
Tyrone Hill
•Quarterly checks are smart, especially with continuation deadlines to track.
0 coins
Romeo Quest
•This is where tools like Certana.ai really help - you can set up document comparison workflows to catch discrepancies early instead of manual checking.
0 coins
Toot-n-Mighty
Update us when you get the amendment filed! Always curious how these situations resolve.
0 coins
Sunny Wang
•Will do. Planning to file the UCC-3 amendment early next week.
0 coins
Effie Alexander
•Good luck! Should be a quick fix.
0 coins