Lory v. Parsoff,  296 A.D.2d 535; 745 N.Y.S.2d 218; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7584 
illustrates the danger of wrongly filing a security documents, such as a UCC1.  Of course, purchaser defaulted, and lender lost all.  In the legal malpractice case, attorney lost its fee paid to date, the cost of trying to fix the case, as well as the value of the secured interest.  In a later appeal, fees paid to the bankruptcy attorney were disallowed.

"An attorney’s failure to file a UCC financing statement in the manner necessary to perfect his client’s security interest constitutes malpractice as a matter of law (see Hart v Carro, Spanbock, Kaster & Cuiffo, 211 AD2d 617; Deb-Jo Constr. v Westphal, 210 AD2d 951). Furthermore, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment on [***3] the cause of action to recover an award of an attorney’s fee expended to retain alternative counsel as a result of the defendants’ malpractice (see Affiliated Credit Adjustors v Carlucci & Legum, 139 AD2d 611). Additionally, there is no merit to the defendants’ challenge to the plaintiff’s claim for a refund of the legal fee paid to them in connection with the negligent representation (see Campagnola v Mulholland, Minion & Roe, 76 NY2d 38)."