| | | are unperfected, the first to attach has priority. Note that | | Section 9-708(b) [Maine cite section 9-1708, subsection (2)] may | | affect the application of subsection (a) [Maine cite subsection | | (1)] to a filing that occurred before the effective date of this | | Article and which would be ineffective to perfect a security | | interest under former Article 9 but effective under this Article. |
|
| | | 4. Competing Perfected Security Interests. When there is | | more than one perfected security interest, the security interests | | rank according to priority in time of filing or perfection. | | "Filing," of course, refers to the filing of an effective | | financing statement. "Perfection" refers to the acquisition of a | | perfected security interest, i.e., one that has attached and as | | to which any required perfection step has been taken. See | | Section 9-308 [Maine cite section 9-1308]. |
|
| | | Example 1: On February 1, A files a financing statement | | covering a certain item of Debtor's equipment. On March 1, B | | files a financing statement covering the same equipment. On | | April 1, B makes a loan to Debtor and obtains a security interest | | in the equipment. On May 1, A makes a loan to Debtor and obtains | | a security interest in the same collateral. A has priority even | | though B's loan was made earlier and was perfected when made. It | | makes no difference whether A knew of B's security interest when | | A made its advance. |
|
| | | The problem stated in Example 1 is peculiar to a notice-filing | | system under which filing may occur before the security interest | | attaches (see Section 9-502 [Maine cite section 9-1502]). The | | justification for determining priority by order of filing lies in | | the necessity of protecting the filing system-that is, of | | allowing the first secured party who has filed to make subsequent | | advances without each time having to check for subsequent filings | | as a condition of protection. Note, however, that this first-to- | | file protection is not absolute. For example, Section 9-324 | | [Maine cite section 9-1324] affords priority to certain purchase- | | money security interests, even if a competing secured party was | | the first to file or perfect. |
|
| | | Example 2: A and B make nonpurchase-money advances secured | | by the same collateral. The collateral is in Debtor's | | possession, and neither security interest is perfected when the | | second advance is made. Whichever secured party first perfects | | its security interest (by taking possession of the collateral or | | by filing) takes priority. It makes no difference whether that | | secured party knows of the other security interest at the time it | | perfects its own. |
|
|