Regarding the PMSI, look to the terms of the security agreement to see whether the one-to-one relationship between debt-to-collateral is preserved (ie did the 10/05 collateral also secure the loan given on 9/06? If so no PMSI) Look to state law for default terms if not spelled out in the agreement (eg in Michigan, there are cases that have held ambiguous revolving credit agreements protect PMSI one-to-one status by default under our revolving credit statute). My guess is the second purchase probably destroyed the PMSI (or they feared it did), hence they took the time to file. Not sure on the name issue; I think better argument is if the debtor’s name is wrong, or if the collateral is not sufficiently described, because those wouldn’t put other creditors on notice of the lien.

No related posts.