How a UCC 3 Can Perfect a Security Interest by Amending the UCC 1

How a UCC-3 Can Perfect a Security Interest by Amending the UCC-1

  1. Existing UCC-1 Filing:
    • There must already be a valid UCC-1 Financing Statement on file. This UCC-1 serves as the initial public notice of the secured transaction and establishes the secured party’s interest in the collateral listed in the filing.
  2. Amending the Collateral Description:
    • A UCC-3 Amendment can be used to update the collateral description in the existing UCC-1. By adding new instruments, property, or assets as collateral, the amendment effectively perfects the secured party’s interest in those newly added items.
  3. Relation Back to the Original Filing Date:
    • The amendment typically relates back to the filing date of the original UCC-1, but only for the originally described collateral. For the newly added collateral, the perfection is effective as of the date the UCC-3 is filed.
  4. Perfection of the New Collateral:
    • Once the UCC-3 is filed and accepted by the appropriate Secretary of State (or relevant filing office), the security interest in the added collateral is perfected. This means the secured party now has an enforceable claim against the added collateral as it pertains to the debtor.

Key Points to Ensure Perfection

  • Proper Description of the New Collateral:
    • The new collateral must be described with sufficient detail in the UCC-3 Amendment. If the collateral is a negotiable instrument, you might include its type, value, maturity date, or any other identifiers.
  • Timely Filing:
    • The UCC-3 must be filed promptly to ensure that the new collateral is perfected before other creditors claim an interest.
  • No Need for a New UCC-1:
    • As long as the existing UCC-1 is valid and active, there is no need to file a new UCC-1. The amendment will update and expand the original filing.

Practical Example

Suppose a secured party initially filed a UCC-1 to perfect an interest in “all investment, commodity and trust deposit accounts contract with attached collateral and proceeds to secure collateral, along with claim of TRADENAME/TRADEMARK, COPYRIGHT/PATENT of the Name KEVIN L WALKER, my mind, body, soul of infants, spirit, and Live Borne Record…”  etc etc… Later, the debtor issues a negotiable instrument (e.g., a promissory note, bill of exchange, letter of credit, etc.) or acquires other assets that the secured party wants to secure. The secured party can:

  • File a UCC-3 Amendment to add the new negotiable instrument or assets as collateral.
  • Once filed and accepted, the security interest in the added collateral is perfected from the date of the UCC-3 filing.

Why a UCC-3 Works in This Case

The UCC-3 functions as an extension or modification of the UCC-1. It allows the secured party to continue using the same financing statement while expanding the scope of the security interest. By adding new collateral via the UCC-3, the secured party maintains the legal framework of the original UCC-1 while updating the agreement to cover additional assets.

Conclusion

A UCC-3 can be a powerful tool for perfecting a security interest in newly added collateral, provided there is an existing UCC-1 Financing Statement to amend. By properly describing the new instrument or property and filing the UCC-3, the secured party ensures that their interest in the new collateral is valid, enforceable, and perfected under the UCC.

Leave your vote

838393 points
More

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

What a California Court Commissioner Really Is and how Charles Rogers Jeremiah Raxter are Engaged in RICO and Felonies in Riverside California 1 1

Riverside, California: What a California Court Commissioner Really Is and how Fraudulent “Commissioner” Charles Rogers, Jeremiah Raxter are Engaged in RICO and Felonies

Charles Rogers (Bar #64530) and Jeremiah D. Raxter (Bar #276811) are engaged in an ongoing scheme of judicial fraud and racketeering in Riverside County, California. Both individuals are inactive members of the California State Bar and have no lawful authority to act as judges or commissioners. Their acts — including issuing bench warrants, signing orders, and presiding over court matters — are void ab initio and constitute federal felonies under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1962. Their actions represent a criminal enterprise under color of law, demanding immediate investigation, disbarment, and prosecution. Public notice is hereby given that all their proceedings are fraudulent and without legal force.

Criminal RICO Syndicate in Riverside County, California: How Lawyers Posing as “Judges,” Clerks, and Deputies Form an Ongoing Enterprise of Fraud, Obstruction, and Human Rights Violations — 42 USC 1984, 18 USC 241-242, RICO, Extortion and more

Organized Judicial Racketeering in Southern California: How Attorneys Masquerading as Judges Collude with Clerks and Sheriffs to Perpetrate Fraud, Extortion, and Civil Rights Violations Under Color of Law

This exposé reveals a coordinated RICO enterprise operating within Riverside County’s justice system, naming Sheriff Chad Bianco, DA Michael Hestrin, Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner, and others for systemic fraud, extortion, and deprivation of rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It further exposes U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal for judicial obstruction and record concealment, constituting willful interference in violation of federal due process. Backed by an active federal RICO lawsuit under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 before Judge Wesley Hsu, the article outlines a pattern of racketeering, forged instruments, false filings, and unlawful evictions. Officials including Pam Bondi, Rob Bonta, Kash Patel, and the FBI have been formally notified but remain silent. This is not isolated misconduct—it is organized crime under color of law. The piece stands as both public notice and evidentiary documentation for further federal action.

RICO-Fueled Courtroom Corruption in Riverside: Attorney Tamara L. Wagner Implicated for Fraud and Abuse of Office

RICO-Fueled Courtroom Corruption in Riverside: Attorney Tamara L. Wagner Implicated for Fraud and Abuse of Office

Tamara L. Wagner (CA Bar #188613), a licensed attorney acting as a judicial officer in Riverside County, is now at the center of a federal removal action citing judicial fraud, civil rights violations, and RICO conspiracy. Defendants allege she is unlawfully practicing law from the bench without constitutional authority, advancing proceedings in open dishonor. Verified affidavits, UCC filings, and summary judgment demands were ignored, leading to claims of railroading and systemic court corruption. The case, removed under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1443, and 1446, is now pending in federal court.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!