Brian, who is in the business of making loans, extended a loan to Melvin (who is in the business of buying expensive alcohol) in the amount of $5,000 so Melvin could buy some fine bottles of scotch. In exchange, Brian and Melvin signed a letter agreement stating that Melvin would be indebted to Brian in the amount of $5,000 and the indebtedness would be secured by "collateral." Brian also filed a UCC-1 covering “Melvin’s scotch, now owned and after-acquired,” a filing which Melvin consented to in an e-mail message.
Being busy with law school, Brian forgot to prepare and have Melvin sign a security agreement. Which statement is most correct?
1. The signed letter agreement was sufficient to create a security interest in Melvin's scotch
2. The financing statement was sufficient to create a security interest in Melvin's scotch
3. The signed letter agreement, the authorized financing statement, and the e-mail message collectively would be sufficient to create a security interest in Melvin's scotch
4. Brian cannot have a security interest in the scotch because Melvin never signed a document entitled "Security Agreement" describing the scotch