Jurisdictional Filing Chart Review Rebecca Longfellow, Indiana Kelly - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jurisdictional Filing Chart Review

Rebecca Longfellow, Indiana Kelly Kopyt, Foster Moore Marissa Soto-Ortiz, Massachusetts Katie Zvolanek, Ohio (Moderator)

Introducing Filing Chart 2020

• 1. Addition of Electronic Filing System

Differences

• List where e-filing systems might

behave differently than stated action for paper filings

• This column is not meant to say “e-

filing prevents this issue” but rather to show when e-filing behaves differently than paper practice.

• 70-80% of filings are now done online

– how does this chart need to evolve to capture this reality?

• Who is still filing on paper? Do

we want to encourage more online filing?

• 2. Address info at the Beginning of the Chart
• On past versions of the chart,

jurisdictions tended to be less likely to reject for missing zip, city, state, etc. for secured party addresses

• Now, responses indicate that address

info for debtor and secured party is treated the same

• Combined into one spot on the chart to

save space and to locate easily.

• 3. UCC1 – Section 1&2 Checkbox scenarios
• Before, there were about 10

different scenarios surrounding whether the box was checked or not – but it doesn’t actually matter

• Complete information is

required in all debtor fields in

• rder for the debtor to be

indexed.

• The box is meant to alert the

person processing that there is info on the following page

• It should not affect how data is

entered

• 4. Assumption 5 addition
• Several scenarios recommend “Accept as to Debtor 1 but not Debtor

2.”

• If a filing is partially accepted, it is important to alert the filer that not

all debtors were indexed. NEW!!!

• 5. Removed “no boxes checked”/ “Accept”

scenarios

• These were areas where, more often than not, boxes are not checked.
• The more important question: “What do we do if the boxes are

checked?” So those scenarios are left and removed the “no boxes checked” scenarios.

• Examples:

• 6. Amendment Combinations
• Added a section to differentiate between paper filings and online filings
• If the answer is “no” to acceptance, don’t need to fill out the rest of the section!
• If an amendment combination is presented, but an office does not accept combos,

does the office reject the whole document or accept as to one and not the other?

• If the latter, which one does the office accept? And how does it alert the filer that it was only

partially accepted?

• 7. Are you the only one in the deviation

column?

• If you are the only jurisdiction that rejects when everyone else accepts,

do you need to re-evaluate that response?

• 8. Should it be rejected?
• What is the statutory reason for rejecting?
• If the rejection reason isn’t found in 9-516, does the jurisdiction have a

supplementary statute/rule authorizing rejection?

• If the answer is reject because of system limitations, do you have plans

to correct your system?

• 9. Section 8 of UCC3 – Collateral Change
• In section 8, many jurisdictions reject if the filer provides info without

checking a box, or if the filer checks all the boxes:

• How is this different from UCC1, 4a, where filer fails to provide any info in

item 4? These same jurisdictions accept this scenario:

• What is the rejection reason on the UCC3?

• 10. Refusal Errors/Filing Office Errors
• Updated these

recommended actions to include in both circumstances, a filing officer statement is necessary

Filing Office Errors – It Happens!

Two Types of Errors

• Refusal Errors
• Reject a document that should have been accepted
• Or even acceptance errors – accept something that should have been rejected
• Entry Errors
• Enter data incorrectly into the information management system
• Handle each one the same – A Filing Office Statement
• Document, document, document.
• If the record is changing, a filing office statement should be placed on the

record to show the date of the change and explain what changed

Filing Office Statement Examples