[Jared_Weitz]

Capify doesn't file a UCC either I believe.

[YuliyaG]

A lot of lenders are starting to not file UCCs period, instead of just using the fake alias names. A lender should know good and well that with today's mass entrants of new brokers all calling UCCs, that filing a UCC on their merchant is about to subject them to 20 calls a day about "funding".

Why a lender would want to do that, knowing full well that's today's climate, is beyond me lol.

I don't think that its the fact of them not filing period. I think it's just that more funders are using companies to file on their behalf... CSC is exploding all over the place... Their growth is outstanding. So while less funders are using themselves + aliases, more are using companies like CSC.

UCC Growth.jpg

[jotucker1983]

Yes, see what I'm finding is that a lot of companies won't even file a UCC on a merchant until they are in the risk category of some sort such as they missed some payments, defaulted altogether, if they are in a higher risk industry, etc.

A lot of companies have been doing this for about two years now though, where they will only file the UCC (either directly or through an alias name) on the higher risk merchants.

Just another reason why calling UCCs is just not a good strategy anymore.

But if I'm a merchant and I find out that the company I'm working with filed this thing called a "UCC" on me that's leading to 10 - 20 phone calls a day tying up my business line, I would be seriously ticked off lol. Even though in certain cases, filing one is needed.

[YuliyaG]

Hmmm... I guess it's truly a mixed bag!

[Zach]

I believe National Funding only files UCCs above 150K.

[Joseph Esparza]

We fund the tough stuff with communication and respect for our partner ISO's. No games...
PM me.
#PLAYBOOK Any Sensible Position. Any SIC with Merit.

[American Funding Group]

We are a direct lender that doesn't file a UCC.