[jotucker1983]

I wanted to get some opinions of some of the contributors here on Daily Funder, because this makes absolutely no sense to me. Can someone help me understand, why in the hell are some companies still filing UCCs on good paying merchants?

- When you are boarding a new deal, it's good to have the paperwork with the merchant signed stating that a UCC could (or would) be filed in relation to the funding, but from my understanding, you don't have to file it.

- You could keep the paperwork on hand and only file it in the case of a slow paying merchant, or some other type of collection or fraud issue. This allows you, per the paperwork, to have related favorable conditions in court or during the collections procedure.

The argument could be made that you are looking to establish a certain "position" in terms of the UCC filing, but couldn't this already be diagnosed through the examination of bank statements?

Most companies are doing loan transactions today, whereas in the prior days with majority split payments (standard MCA deals), it would make more sense as to why the UCC would need to be filed because it would be difficult for someone else to know about the transaction.

It just seems completely damn asinine to me, to have a good paying merchant get harassed by 30 damn calls a day by green brokers who can't even spell "merchant cash advance". All this does is piss the merchant off to where they don't want to renew with you (the broker who closed them) anymore.

It's common damn knowledge that this is going on, so why in the hell are these UCCs still being filed on good merchants by many companies today? Can someone help me understand this?