Print

Print


We file them and record them in the land records IF they request
recording - Remember that utilities' UCC's are kept FOREVER so, thanks
to Vermont Yankee, we'll have a separate UCC file forever also.  There
are also other UCC's that have to be kept and are not to be purged as
well.

Have fun!
Sandy

-----Original Message-----
From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kim Pombar
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 12:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: UCC Fees

We have a seperate file also for UCC's. Filing in the land records
sounds
alot easier. Having records all in one place makes the most sense. I
think
we may switch and start recording in land records as of Jan 1,2004.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ann Webster" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: UCC Fees


> Janet, didn't mean to add to any confusion. The UCCs were supposed to
start
> getting filed at the State level just about the time you and I started
in
> our respective clerk offices. My understanding at the time was that if
> anyone brought a UCC to my office to be filed I would still have to
keep a
> separate UCC file and index. There is a box to check on the bottom of
the
> form if the customer also wants the document filed in the land
records.
You
> only have to put them in the land records if they request it.
>
> My confusion stems from not knowing if I have to keep a separate UCC
file
or
> just put them all in the land records only. It looks like Huntington
and
> Milton only put them in the land records. Currently we only put them
in a
> UCC file and then record and charge additional fees if they also want
them
> in the land records.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Janet Oosterman [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 1:27 PM
> > To:   [log in to unmask]
> > Subject:      Re: UCC Fees
> >
> > I've only been here for a couple of years, but we charge the $10.00
and
> > still keep a separate UCC file and index. We haven't been recording
them
> > in the land records - should we be doing that? We only get a few /
year.
> >
> > Susan Ann wrote:
> >
> > > Ann, we are consistent with you; our procedure is the same as
yours.
We
> > > have the same understanding.  Sue Ann
> > >
> > >
> > > At 12:05 PM 12/9/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> > >
> > >> I know we have had this question before so I apologize. Currently
when
> > >> Middlebury receives a UCC and the customer wants it recorded in
the
> > land
> > >> records we charge the UCC filing fee of $10. We give the document
a
> > >> UCC #
> > >> and file and index appropriately. We also charge the per page fee
of
> > >> $7 to
> > >> record the document in the land records. This issue went back and
> > >> forth in
> > >> muninet a while ago. My understanding at the time was that we
must
> > >> file a
> > >> UCC as a UCC if we receive it in our office and the land
recording
was
> > >> extra.
> > >>
> > >> I have one lawyers office that gives me a hard time about the
fees
> > >> everytime
> > >> they record. I have Talked with Mark Reeves at Public Records and
he
> > >> was not
> > >> sure and advised me to contact the Sec St office. I spoke with
Linda
> > >> Safford/Betty Poulin at that office and they advised that we
could
> > >> charge
> > >> for both recording and filing separately. But I was still
confused
> > about
> > >> some of the wording in the VT Statutes on line pertaining to UCC
Fees.
> > I
> > >> emailed Deb Markowitz and she had Gregory Sanford email a
response.
> > >> Below is
> > >> a copy of that response. Does anyone have any words of wisdom on
this
> > >> issue?
> > >>
> > >> Copy of Response
> > >> Ann: Deborah asked me to respond, though I fear I do not have the
> > >> knowledge
> > >> to
> > >> offer an informed response.  My only suggestions are to poll the
> > Addison
> > >> County
> > >> clerks to see what they do so there is, if possible, a consistent
local
> > >> response and
> > >> then build a policy around the advice you have received from Mark
> > >> Reaves,
> > >> Betty
> > >> Poulin and the neighboring clerks.  That would show due diligence
in
> > >> developing a
> > >> policy based on apparently contradictory statutory guidance.  You
may
> > >> want
> > >> to see if
> > >> your colleagues have had similar problems and whether the VMCTA
would
> > >> want
> > >> to
> > >> pursue clarification through legislation this coming session.
Sorry
> > >> this
> > >> was not more
> > >> helpful. Gregory
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Ann F. Webster
> > >> Middlebury Town Clerk/Treasurer
> > >> 94 Main Street
> > >> Middlebury VT 05753
> > >>
> > >> 802-388-8102
> > >
> > >
> > > Susan Ann Arnebold
> > > Orwell Town Clerk
> > > PO Box 32
> > > Orwell, Vermont 05760
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > 802-948-2032
> > >
>
>