CO Code § 4-9-801 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 8 - Transition Provisions for 2010 Amendments|§ 4-9-801. Effective Date

 House Bill 12-1262, enacted in 2012, takes effect on July 1, 2013.   History. Source: L. 2012: Entire part added, (HB 12-1262), ch. 170, p. 604, § 16, effective July 1, 2013.    Cross references:   For offenses relating to this title, see part 5 of article 5 of title 18.   Official Comments   Copyright by the American Law Institute and the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Reproduced with the permission of the Permanent Editorial Board for the Uniform Commercial Code. All rights reserved. —   Editor's note:   The Official Comments to the Uniform Commercial Code are available only in the printed book form of Colorado Revised Statutes. As noted above, the Official Comments are subject to copyright by the American Law Institute and the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. At this time, Colorado has a license to reprint the Official Comments in the printed book form.   Editor's note:    The numbering and sequencing of C.R.S. subsections do not necessarily correspond with the numbering and sequencing of subsections in the uniform act.    This article was numbered as article 9 of chapter 155, C.R.S. 1963. The provisions of this article were repealed and reenacted in 2001, resulting in the addition, relocation, and elimination of sections as well as subject matter. For amendments to this article prior to 2001, consult the Colorado statutory research explanatory note and the table itemizing the replacement volumes and supplements to the original volume of C.R.S. 1973 beginning on page vii in the front of this volume. Former C.R.S. section numbers are shown in editor's notes following those sections that were relocated. For a detailed comparison of this article, see the comparative tables located in the back of the index.     Law reviews:   For article, “Lien and Security Interest Provision of AAPL Model Operating Agreement”, see 13 Colo. Law. 1216 ; for a discussion of a Tenth Circuit decision dealing with secured transactions, see 66 Den. U. L. Rev. 795 (1989); for article, “Mastering The Maze of Secured Transactions - Part 1”, see 21 Colo. Law. 2329 (1992); for article, “Remastering the Maze: Revisions to UCC Article 9 Filing Provisions”, see 25 Colo. Law. 3 (June 1996); for article, “Introducing Revised Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code”, see 30 Colo. Law. 9 (Sept. 2001); for article, “Perfecting Security Interests in Intellectual Property”, see 32 Colo. Law. 85 (April 2003).   OFFICIAL COMMENT   These transition provisions largely track the provisions of Part 7, which govern the transition to the 1998 revision of this Article. The Comments to the sections of Part 7 generally are relevant to the corresponding sections of Part 8. The 2010 amendments are less far-reaching than the 1998 revision. Although Part 8 does not carry forward those Part 7 provisions that clearly would have no application to the transition to the amendments, as a matter of prudence Part 8 does carry forward all Part 7 provisions that are even arguably relevant to the transition.   The most significant transition problem raised by the 2010 amendments arises from changes to Section 9-503(a), concerning the name of the debtor that must be provided for a financing statement to be sufficient. Sections 9-805 and 9-806 address this problem.   Example: On November 8, 2012, Debtor, an individual whose “individual name” is “Lon Debtor” and whose principal residence is located in State A, creates a security interest in certain manufacturing equipment. On November 15, 2012, SP perfects a security interest in the equipment under Article 9 (as in effect prior to the 2010 amendments) by filing a financing statement against “Lon Debtor” in the State A filing office. On July 1, 2013, the 2010 amendments, including Alternative A to Section 9-503(a), take effect in State A. Debtor's unexpired State A driver's indicates that Debtor's name is “Polonius Debtor.” Assuming that a search under “Polonius Debtor” using the filing office's standard search logic would not disclose the filed financing statement, the financing statement would be insufficient under amended Section 9-503(a)(4) (Alt. A). However, Section 9-805(b) provides that the 2010 amendments do not render the financing statement ineffective. Rather, the financing statement remains effective — even if it has become seriously misleading — until it would have ceased to be effective had the amendments not taken effect. See Section 9-805(b)(1). SP can continue the effectiveness of the financing statement by filing a continuation statement with the State A filing office. To do so, however, SP must amend Debtor's name on the financing statement to provide the name that is sufficient under Section 9-503(a)(4) (Alt. A) at the time the continuation statement is filed. See Section 9-805(c), (e).   The most significant transition problem addressed by the 1998 revision arose from the change in the choice-of-law rules governing where to file a financing statement. The 2010 amendments do not change the choice-of-law rules. Even so, the amendments will change the place to file in a few cases, because certain entities that were not previously classified as “registered organizations” would fall within that category under the amendments.