I’m the Lucky One; a story of hope and healing

Greetings!

I’m excited and proud to publish my first ebook, I’m the Lucky One; a story of hope and healing. This is the first in a series of books I intend to publish chronicling my journey of self-discovery, empowerment and healing. Please also check out our not-for-profit organization YesHope.org which is committed to sharing the techniques I and others have discovered to empower and heal ourselves. You can download the book by clicking the title below.

Be well!

Tina K. Gehres,

President & CEO

Gehres Law Group, P.C.

I’m the Lucky One; a story of hope and healing

By Tina K. Gehres

The post I’m the Lucky One; a story of hope and healing appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/34aYly8
via IFTTT

California Conservatorships – What to do when a family member or loved one needs help

You might get that dreaded 3am phone call.  It’s never good news. Your parent, spouse or partner has finally succumbed to dementia or another debilitating illness, or your child has been in an accident that has left them incapacitated. After getting your loved one stabilized, you are told by doctors that normal functioning may be a long way off. Now what?

A conservatorship allows an individual or organization to make critical decisions regarding the financial matters and/or medical needs of a person who is unable to make those decisions or care for themselves. In California, a conservator is appointed and approved by the court, and he/she is responsible for acting in the best interest of the conservatee.

Conservatorship Appointments

The following is a brief description of the four different conservatorship appointments:

• Estate. Allows the conservator to manage the finances of the conservatee (ie: the conservator can help manage the finances of an elderly parent who is unable to pay bills or make financial decisions).
• Person. Allows the conservator to make medical care and living decisions (ie: the conservator can help move their elderly parent to a skilled care facility where they can get the help they need).
• Limited conservatorship. Allows conservator to make certain decisions for the conservatee (the parents of an adult disabled child can help with important decisions, financial, etc., while still allowing the child the            authority to make other decisions, such as work and living arrangements).
• Joint conservatorship. Allows two or more people to be named as conservators for one conservatee.

Steps to take

The conservatorship appointment process in California can be onerous, time-consuming, confusing and expensive.  It generally involves the following:

• Filing the Petition. The petition must include information about the proposed conservator and conservatee, relatives, and the petitioner (the person filing the case in court), and the reasons why a conservatorship is necessary. It must also explain why the possible alternatives to a conservatorship are not available in this case.
• Informing the conservatee and relatives. The petitioner must have someone else personally deliver a citation and a copy of the petition to the proposed conservatee and mail a written notice about the court hearing on the conservatorship petition, together with a copy of the petition, to the conservatee’s spouse or domestic partner and close relatives.
• Investigation by a court investigator. A court investigator will talk to the proposed conservatee and others who may be familiar with the conservatee’s condition. The court will assess the conservatee’s estate for the cost of this investigation unless the court decides that the assessment would be a hardship for the conservatee.
• Hearing. The proposed conservatee must go to the hearing unless he or she is excused because of illness. At the hearing, a judge will determine if everyone has been properly notified and if a lawyer needs to be appointed to represent the proposed conservatee. Once the judge is ready to make a decision, he or she may grant or deny the conservatorship. If the judge grants the petition, an order appointing the conservator will be filed and Letters of Conservatorship will be issued.

Conclusion

Conservatorships are a critical tool for caring for friend and family members who are in need, but it is important to weigh your options and consult with an experienced attorney before filing a petition with the court. Attorneys with the Gehres Law Group are here to help and can provide the guidance you need during the difficult and emotional process. Schedule your free phone consultation today.

The post California Conservatorships – What to do when a family member or loved one needs help appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/2QDXO1z
via IFTTT

What Businesses Should Know About the California Consumer Privacy Act

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), or AB-375 as it is officially known, was enacted in 2018 and goes into effect on January 1, 2020. This landmark legislation provides the broadest protections for consumers’ personal information of any state in the country. For California consumers, it is a game-changer. For many companies who do business in California, it is one more potential land mine to navigate.

New Consumer Rights Under the CCPA

• The right to know what personal information is collected, used, shared or sold, both as to the categories and specific pieces of personal information collected by a company;
• The right to delete personal information held by businesses and by extension, a business’s service provider;
• The right to opt-out of sale of personal information. Under the CCPA, consumers are now able to direct a business that sells personal information to stop selling that information;
• Minors under the age of 16 must provide opt in consent, with a parent or guardian consenting for children under 13;
• The right to non-discrimination in terms of price or service when a consumer exercises a privacy right under the CCPA.

Which California Businesses Does the CCPA Apply to?

• Any companies which do business in the State of California, and who have gross annual revenues in excess of $25 million;[1] or,
• Buys, receives, or sells the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers, households; or devices; or,
• Derives 50 percent or more of its annual revenues from selling consumers’ personal information.

Note: As proposed by the draft regulations slated to go into effect on the same date as the CCPA, businesses that handle the personal information of more than four million consumers will have additional obligations.

Specific Obligations on Businesses under the CCPA

• Businesses subject to the CCPA must provide notice to consumers at or before data collection;
• Businesses must create procedures to respond to requests from consumers regarding their right to opt-out, know, and delete;
• For requests to opt-out, businesses must provide a “Do Not Sell My Info” link on their website or mobile app;
• Businesses must respond to requests from consumers to know, delete, and opt-out within specific time frames;
• As proposed by the draft regulations, businesses must treat user-enabled privacy settings that signal a consumer’s choice to opt-out as a validly submitted opt-out request;
• Businesses must now verify the identity of consumers who make requests to know and to delete, whether or not the consumer maintains a password-protected account with the business;
• As proposed by the draft regulations, if a business is unable to verify a request, it may deny it, but must comply to the greatest extent it can. For example, it must treat a request to delete as a request to opt-out;
• As proposed by the draft regulations, businesses must disclose financial incentives offered in exchange for the retention or sale of a consumer’s personal information, and explain how they calculate the value of the personal information. Businesses must also explain how the incentive is permitted under the CCPA;
• As proposed by the draft regulations, businesses must maintain records of requests and how they responded for 24 months in order to demonstrate their compliance;
• Businesses that collect, buy, or sell the personal information of more than 4 million consumers have additional record-keeping and training obligations.

For more information on this sweeping new law, click here or reach out to the trusted attorneys of Gehres Law Group to assist your company in avoiding these new land mines. Call us at 858-964-2314 or send us an email to info@gehreslaw.com.

[1] Insurance institutions, agents, and support organizations are expressly exempted from coverage by the CCPA as they are already subject to similar regulations under California’s Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act (IIPPA).

 

The post What Businesses Should Know About the California Consumer Privacy Act appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/2PXzQxX
via IFTTT

NON-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE IN CALIFORNIA

Introduction

Consider the typical situation when a person wishes to purchase a home. The purchaser typically puts a certain amount of money down, say 10% of the purchase price, and finances the remaining 90% through a loan from a bank or other mortgage lender. The purchaser then signs a promissory note in favor of the lender and executes a trust deed or mortgage on the property to secure the lender. The trust deed on a mortgage provides the lender with security in the event the purchaser fails to make required payments on the loan. Typically, the loan would be paid off over a 30-year or 15-year fixed period, or when the property is sold and transferred to a new purchaser.

However, in some instances, the purchaser is unable to continue making monthly mortgage payments, and he defaults on the loan. In that instance, the lender will “foreclose,” and seek to recover the remaining balance on the loan. There are two ways for the lender to proceed. One way is for the lender to bring a judicial foreclosure action, which is a legal proceeding in court. The other, more common method of foreclosure in California, is for the lender to institute a non-judicial foreclosure, also known as a “private sale.”

Since a judicial foreclosure proceeding is an action in court, it may take a year or more to resolve, and will be subject to the all of the defenses a borrower may have in a breach of contract action, including the statutes of limitation applicable to such actions. In the case of a judicial foreclosure action, the four-year statute of limitations for breach of a written contract would apply. Since this type of foreclosure requires full court proceedings, the lender would typically need to hire an attorney to prosecute the action.

Non-Judicial Foreclosures

A non-judicial foreclosure action, on the other hand, is not an action filed in court and, therefore, is not subject to a statute of limitations defense. Moreover, a non-judicial foreclosure may result in a foreclosure sale, with proceeds paid to the lender, in a much shorter period of time than would be the case in a judicial foreclosure action.  That period of time may be as short as 110 days from the time the lender provides the purchaser with notice of default. Nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings are also less expensive than judicial foreclosure proceedings, since the lender may not require the assistance of an attorney.

Since non-judicial foreclosure proceedings are quicker and less expensive than judicial foreclosure proceedings, the question arises, why would a lender proceed judicially? The answer is that, in some cases, a lender may be able to obtain not only the amount for which the property is sold, but also the difference between the sale price and the full amount the lender is owed (i.e., the “deficiency”), in the event the sale proceeds are less than what the lender is owed.  In that instance, the lender will be made whole through a judicial foreclosure proceeding.  In contrast, in a non-judicial “private sale,” the lender may not recover any deficiency.

California Anti-Deficiency Statutes

However, a judicial foreclosure proceeding is not available in many, if not most instances in California. Consider the typical scenario mentioned above: a purchaser obtains a loan in order to purchase a home in which he intends to live. In that situation, the “anti-deficiency” statutes apply. The anti-deficiency statutes provide that a lender may not obtain a deficiency judgment under a deed of trust or mortgage given to the lender to secure repayment of a loan that was in fact used to pay all or part of the purchase price of the dwelling, if the dwelling is occupied entirely or in part by the purchaser. In the case of such a “purchase money loan,” no deficiency may be collected by the lender.

One Form of Action Rule

Also relevant in the typical scenario referred to above is California’s “one-form-of-action rule.” This rule provides that foreclosure is the only form of action that may be pursued by a lender to recover any debt or enforce any right secured by a trust deed or mortgage. Under the one-form-of-action rule, if the purchaser/borrower defaults on the loan secured by a deed of trust or mortgage given to the bank or other mortgage lender, the lender must look to recover what the lender is owed first — and perhaps only — from the security, that is, the property subject to the trust deed or mortgage. Moreover, in the “purchase money loan” scenario described above, the lender will not be able to seek or obtain a “deficiency” and, therefore, must proceed by way of non-judicial foreclosure, rather than a judicial foreclosure action.

In the event the property is sold in a non-judicial foreclosure proceeding, the lender will be paid first out of the proceeds of sale. If the lender is paid in full, any remaining funds will be paid to the purchaser/borrower if there are no other lenders with security interests in the property, or to any such secured lenders subordinate to the bank or other mortgage lender which provided the original loan enabling the purchaser/borrower to purchase the subject property. Of course, typically the proceeds of sale will not be sufficient to pay the original lender, so there will be nothing left after partial payment of the loan is made to the original lender out of the proceeds of sale.

Junior Liens

It is not uncommon for a producer/borrower to obtain a home equity line of credit (HELOC) or other form of second loan, giving the second lender a trust deed or mortgage on the same property. In that instance, the second lender, or “junior lienor,” will have security in the property for repayment of the loan, but that security will be subordinate to the original lender who holds a first trust deed or mortgage on the property.

In that situation, in what position does the second trust deed holder find himself if the original purchaser/borrower defaults on the loan he obtained from the original lender? In a typical situation, the original lender will institute a non-judicial foreclosure proceeding. If there are insufficient funds from the sale of the property to fully pay off the first trust deed holder, there will be nothing left to pay off the second trust deed holder. In that event, the second trust deed holder, also referred to as a “sold-out junior lienor,” will not benefit from a foreclosure proceeding, either judicial or non-judicial, because his security for the property will have been wiped out. Since he no longer has a security interest in the property, he is not constrained by the one-form-of-action rule, and may seek a personal judgment against the borrower.

Co-signors

One final note: the one-form-of-action rule in the anti-deficiency statutes does not apply to in the event the lender has obtained a guarantee of the loan from a third-party. In that event, if the purchaser/borrower has defaulted on the loan, the lender may file a legal action against the guarantor on the guarantee, and may collect the full amount of the unpaid loan from the guarantor.

For further information, contact our team of trusted attorneys at Gehres Law Group.

Applicable statutes include: CA Civil Code §2924; CA Civ. Proc. §580d; CA Civil Code §2932-33; CA Civ. Proc. §580b; CA Civ. Proc. §726(a).

The post NON-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE IN CALIFORNIA appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/2Dolele
via IFTTT

2019 – A Vintage Year for Irrevocable Living Trusts

Although California produces stellar wine vintages year after year, there has been relatively little production of anything new or positive for California non-grantor trusts. But the landscape has changed, the conditions are ideal, and the time is ripe. A recent crop of legislation and cases, including California’s new Uniform Trust Decanting Act and the Paula Trust case, might make 2019 a vintage year for updating irrevocable trusts, overhauling estate/gifting plans, and potentially reducing California tax exposure.

CA Decanting

The California Uniform Trust Decanting Act (“CUTDA”), which took effect January 1, 2019, has significantly eased restrictions and limitations on trust fiduciaries when it comes to “updating” irrevocable trusts in California. “Decanting” an old trust, similar to decanting an old wine, is literally the act of pouring the assets and provisions from an outdated irrevocable trust into a brand-new irrevocable trust. The crucial difference is that wine decanting involves pouring the same wine into a different container. Trust decanting, on the other hand, allows fiduciaries the ability to modify the trust’s terms and provisions, resulting in a substantially different and improved container.

Before passage of the CUTDA, a fiduciary’s ability to modify the terms and provisions of an irrevocable trust in California, with certain exceptions, was limited, time consuming and expensive. In most cases, the fiduciary was required to obtain the consent of all the trust’s beneficiaries, and a court hearing was needed to make any proposed changes. And even if the fiduciary was able to overcome these obstacles, their power to make substantive modifications to the original trust instrument was severely restricted.

Under the CUTDA, a fiduciary now has the power to decant and modify an irrevocable trust without the consent of the settlor, beneficiaries, or the court.  The fiduciary must still provide notice to all of the interested parties above (as well as the California Attorney General if the trust has charitable components), but their approval and consent is no longer required.

Fiduciaries can use decanting to make administrative changes and, depending upon the authority granted to them by the original trust, they may also have the power to make significant substantive changes. Fiduciaries with “expanded distributive discretion” can alter both administrative and dispositive provisions, including modifications to distributions, beneficiaries, appointments and trust duration.  Decanting power does not mean unlimited power and unfettered discretion – the decanted trust’s “juice” can be modified and fortified, but it can’t be replaced with an entirely different product. Fiduciaries are still restricted when it comes to modifying their own powers, liabilities and compensation. In addition, they are barred from making any changes that alter the trust’s charitable components and/or negatively affect its tax status.

Fiduciaries are free, however, to make changes that positively affect the trust’s tax status. The Paula Trust case, coupled with the new decanting powers under CUTDA, could very well provide trustees with a perfect window to make that happen.

The Paula Trust Case

In general, the income of a non-grantor trust is subject to taxation in California if that trust’s fiduciary or beneficiary is a resident of California.^[1] The California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) has generally taken the position that all California-source income is subject to taxation and all other trust income is eligible for apportionment according to a formula involving the trust’s fiduciaries and beneficiaries.^[2]

The Paula Trust v. FTB ^[3] decision rejected the FTB’s historic position and held that all of the Paula Trust’s income, including all of its California-source income, was eligible for apportionment. A 2007 sale of the Paula Trust’s property resulted in a $2.8M capital gain in California, and the Paula Trust successfully argued that the same tax structure should be applicable to both California-source and non-California-source income. By applying the apportionment formula, the Paula Trust was able to defer California taxes on roughly $1.4M of the gain. The Paula Trust decision is being appealed by the FTB, but it’s currently the law of California.

Dust Off Your California Irrevocable Trust and Pop the Cork

There are additional compelling factors making 2019 an opportune time to evaluate and overhaul existing estate and gifting strategies, including the potential sunsetting of the high federal basic exclusion amount at the end of 2025, CA Senate Bill 378 which could establish a separate and punitive estate tax regime in California, and the availability of new insurance products that can help mitigate tax burdens.

An effective estate plan, like a vintage Napa cabernet or First Growth Bordeaux, is a precious and enduring gift that needs to be preserved and protected for future generations to enjoy and cherish.  If you are a trustee or fiduciary of a non-grantor California trust that is past its prime, the Decanting Statute and Paula Trust decision may empower you to make substantive changes that better serve the evolving needs of the trust’s beneficiaries while significantly reducing (and possibly eliminating altogether) California tax exposure. The attorneys at Gehres Law Group can help guide you through the options and find the right fit that integrates your business and personal goals, mitigates risk and uncertainty, and maximizes potential benefits for your family and loved ones regardless of what the future may hold.

[1] Cal. Rev. & Tax Code §17742(a)

[2] Cal. Code Regs. tit. 18, §17743

[3] Paula Trust v. Cal. Franchise Tax Bd., 2018 Cal. Super. LEXIS 644 (currently under appeal by FTB)

The post 2019 – A Vintage Year for Irrevocable Living Trusts appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/2Qtp4l3
via IFTTT

Can I Really Tell You Everything? California Attorney/Client Privilege

Introduction

Most of us are familiar with the attorney–client privilege in terms of protections provided in criminal cases and prosecutions. But what about its application to civil and business related matters? Through television and movies, most of us have learned that if you tell your lawyer all your dirty deeds he or she can’t tell anyone about it. This is true for the most part, as set out in California Evidence Code 954, as well as case law and standards established by federal, state courts and the American Bar Association. Confidential communications between clients and their attorney are generally privileged. However, like most rules, there are exceptions. Two more common exceptions are: 1) you convey an intent to do future harm (not your past bad deeds or crimes); or, 2) matters of fraud.

Matters of Fraud

It’s this second exception that comes into play most often when entering the civil law forum. If you convey to your attorney an intent to commit, and in fact do so commit, a fraud upon the court, through submission of false testimony or false documents, your privilege may not protect you. Using this exception, courts can order an attorney to reveal otherwise privileged or confidential information in circumstances relating to major crimes and fraud. In addition, this exception requires an attorney to disclose information to a court if a client reveals that he or she is planning to carry out a crime or fraud, or is in the process of doing so. However, an attorney is not required to reveal whether a past crime has been committed.

For example, if you or your business is involved in a civil suit regarding allegations of stolen funds, the judge can order your counsel to turn over documentation of conversations between the two of you which involve plans or methods to commit acts for the purpose of misappropriating funds. See United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554 (1989); See also Geilim v. Superior Court, 234 Cal. App. 3d 166, 285 Cal. Rptr. 602 (1991).

Attorney/Client Relationship

In order for the privilege to be in effect, and your communications to be protected, there must exist a valid attorney-client relationship. Money does not necessarily need to exchange hands. However, it is typically advisable to withhold details and information from an attorney until they confirm in writing that the privilege applies, as this constitutes nearly irrefutable evidence that the parties intended to and did enter into an attorney-client relationship.  Any information given for the purposes of retaining an attorney, for example, during consultation, is typically considered privileged, but should there be a dispute about whether such a relationship was formed, written evidence is usually the best evidence. And of course, information gained during the course of representation is protected by the privilege, absent one of the narrow exceptions; this includes verbal communications as well as documents shared with your attorney and documents prepared during the course of or in furtherance of representation.

Work-Product

Attorney work product privilege, as provided in the California Code of Civil Procedure, acts for the purpose of allowing attorneys to:

• “…prepare cases for trial with that degree of privacy necessary to encourage them to prepare their cases thoroughly and to investigate not only the favorable but the unfavorable aspects of those cases” (CCP 2018.020(a)); and,
• “prevent attorneys from taking undue advantage of their adversary’s industry and efforts” (CCP 2018.020(b)).

Writings that reflect an attorney’s “impressions, conclusion, opinions, or legal research or theories” (CCP 2018.030(a)) are also not discoverable, or, in other words, are “protected”. All other material considered to be work product can become discoverable if a court determines that the party seeking the information or documents will be unfairly prejudiced without such disclosure (CCP 2018.030(b)).

Privilege Log

Your attorney can create a “privilege log,” either in anticipation of requests by outside parties for discovery, or simply as a proactive measure to ensure protection of communications and documents you would like to ensure are privileged. Entire documents and other documentations of communications can be listed and then designated as privileged, and the reasons for the privilege given for each item. Documents otherwise discoverable can be redacted for sensitive information and those redactions may be noted with the corresponding privilege and reasons for the privilege clearly stated.

Waiver of Privilege by the Client

A client can intentionally waive the privilege and allow confidential information to be released by their attorney.  More often than not, however, the privilege is waived unintentionally by the client or in a careless way. For example, having third parties present during communications with your attorney can waive the privilege. Speaking publicly or releasing information over social media can also waive the privilege. Similarly, having a conversation with another person which could reasonably be heard by a third party does not create a privilege between you and that third party, so it is important to remember that the privilege does not apply to third parties. Rather, the attorney-client privilege is only between you and your counsel.

Duty of Confidentiality

Clients are afforded an extra layer of protection in addition to the attorney-client privilege under the Duty of Confidentiality, as proscribed by the Code of Ethics and ABA standards. This means that a lawyer must keep their clients’ confidences and “secrets” even after representation ends or after the death of their client. As determined by the various state bar rule making authorities, it is in the best interest of the system as a whole that a client feel comfortable and willing to be honest with their attorney.

Conclusion

Overall, there exists a very broad blanket of security for communications between a client and their attorney, and the exceptions are typically interpreted quite narrowly. However, because there are some exceptions, it is important to ask your attorney if you have any concerns of confidentiality during consultation, and work with your attorney to make sure important communications and documents remain protected and secure.

The post Can I Really Tell You Everything? California Attorney/Client Privilege appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/361G4E9
via IFTTT

THE CALIFORNIA UCC AND ME

Why should I care and what should I know?

Whether you’re a small business owner who’s hoping to expand, or just getting started; or, as often times in today’s economy, in need of some extra capital to stay afloat, you’re more than likely going to come into contact with a UCC Form-1 filing.

What is the UCC?

The UCC, or Uniform Commercial Code, is a uniform set of laws established to regulate sales of personal property and other business transactions. It contains legal rules and regulations governing commercial or business dealings and transactions. Each state has adopted sections of the code as state law, including California. In this discussion, we focus on the UCC-1 Financial Statement filing or lien as it may affect you and your business transactions. For additional information on which of the UCC articles that have been adopted in California, click here.

UCC-1 Financial Statement

According to the California Secretary of State’s website, a UCC-1 filing is:

a financial statement … filed to perfect a security interest in named collateral and establishes priority in case of debtor default or bankruptcy…

Ok, so what does that mean?  Simply put, it is a method for a lender to secure personal property as collateral on a loan to ensure they are repaid. Should the borrower default, the lender has the right to seize and sell the encumbered assets to satisfy the debt.

In contrast, it is important to note that real property is typically secured by a lien on the property, which is filed with the county recorder of deeds office where the property is located, not with the state. However, when you secure a loan using personal property, which is basically anything except real property (real estate), the lender will file a UCC-1 Filing Statement giving them a right to collect on the loan amount by repossessing or seizing your personal property or their liquidated assets. It also provides notice to future potential creditors that the assets have been encumbered, giving priority to the first creditor to file a lien against the asset in the event the borrower defaults or files for bankruptcy protection.

Example Scenarios

There are numerous ways that these filings can come into play.  For example, if you purchase on credit an expensive piece of manufacturing equipment or a tangible asset specific to your business needs, the seller can (and most likely will) file a UCC- 1 Form.  In this case, if you default on your payment arrangements the seller can simply come and take back the product. Or, perhaps you’ve entered into a security agreement on a note to purchase business assets. In that case, the lender can either a) list specific property that amounts to the value of the loan; or b) include a blanket lien whereby the lender may seize any and all of your business assets to the extent of your liability on the note. Assuming the security agreement permits foreclosure without obtaining a judgment against the borrower, the lender may unilaterally take possession of the assets, sometimes without notice, and sell them to satisfy the amount due, which usually includes the costs of foreclosure.

UCC-1 Filings and Your Business Credit Rating

If you have one or more UCC-1 liens in connection with your business assets, it is critical that you actively keep track of how they show on your credit report.  If you satisfy a lien, the UCC-1 is NOT AUTOMATICALLY REMOVED from your credit report.  Let’s say a lien is reported on your business credit report on a specific piece of equipment. You made all the required payments pursuant to your loan agreement and the lender stopped sending you invoices. It is not safe to assume, under these circumstances, that the UCC lien has been extinguished; you still have to make sure the lender files a Form-3 that effectively removes the original lien.

Failing to ensure UCC-1 liens are removed will negatively affect your ability to get additional or future loans, financing, etc.  If a prospective lender or purchaser of your business assets runs a check on your business and sees outstanding UCC-1 filings, that can directly affect the image and attractiveness of your business, and your business credit rating. Ultimately, the more encumbrances there are on your business assets, the less attractive you become as a borrower.

Be aware, also, that you cannot typically use personal property to secure a loan if a lien has already been filed against it, unless the lender expressly agrees to take second priority, which usually results in a much higher interest rate. This is another important reason to make sure that you not only keep close track of any active UCC-1 filings, but when one has been satisfied, you ensure the original lender files the proper documents to release the lien, which will then be reflected on your business credit report.

How We Can Help

The award-winning and AV-rated attorneys at Gehres Law Group, P.C. handle a variety of business and contract law matters, including asset protection, forming and maintaining businesses and corporations as well as arbitration, mediation and even litigation should the need arise. Contact us at (858) 964-2314 or by e-mail at info@gehreslaw.com for a complementary evaluation (for new clients).

© 2019 Gehres Law Group, P.C. We hope you found this article helpful and appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have. It is for general information only and should not be construed to constitute formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.

The post THE CALIFORNIA UCC AND ME appeared first on Gehres Law Group.

from Gehres Law Group https://ift.tt/2IcbLAi
via IFTTT