Section 1-9-605 - [Effective 11/1/2024] Unknown debtor or secondary obligor(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a secured party does not owe a duty based on its status as secured party: (1) to a person that is a debtor or obligor, unless the secured party knows: (A) that the person is a debtor or obligor;(B) the identity of the person; and(C) how to communicate with the person; or(2) to a secured party or lienholder that has filed a financing statement against a person, unless the secured party knows: (A) that the person is a debtor; and(B) the identity of the person.(b) A secured party owes a duty based on its status as a secured party to a person if, at the time the secured party obtains control of collateral that is a controllable account, controllable electronic record, or controllable payment intangible or at the time the security interest attaches to the collateral, whichever is later: (1) the person is a debtor or obligor; and(2) the secured party knows that the information in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section relating to the person is not provided by the collateral, a record attached to or logically associated with the collateral, or the system in which the collateral is recorded.Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 1-9-605
Amended by Laws 2024, c. 13,s. 79, eff. 11/1/2024.Added by Laws 2000 , SB 1519, c. 371, § 112, eff. 7/1/2001.Oklahoma Code Comment
Revised section 9-605 is entirely new to Article 9 and affords protection in connection with violations involving parties unknown to the secured party.
An issue that may arise under this section is whether the secured party must take steps to acquire the requisite knowledge before it can claim the protection afforded by this section. Undoubtedly, the unwaivable obligation of the secured party to act in good faith prevents the secured party from burying its head in the sand, but the extent to which a secured party must take affirmative steps to acquire the requisite knowledge remains unclear in this age of electronic record-keeping and on-line information. Oklahoma cases like Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Lumber Products Co., 590 P.2d 661 (Okla. 1979) and Smiley v. Wheeler, 602 P.2d 209 (Okla. 1979) demonstrate that a transferee of collateral is not insulated from debt liability, and that efforts by a transferee an assignee to avoid detection by the secured party should not be rewarded. This new provision assists that result.
This section is set out more than once due to postponed, multiple, or conflicting amendments.