If errors are revealed, lenders may also consider whether additional security documents should be granted to ensure the security of the lender`s rights, but it takes time and costs to clarify, and if the error is the fault of the lender or its lawyers, the borrower is probably not willing to compensate the lender for the costs incurred. While this approach could prove costly for a lender (or the lawyers who might be the source of the error and who might need to prepare additional security documents free of charge), a court could consider a lender willing to bear the costs of correcting the error if that lender later needs the court`s assistance in this case, whether the lender is able to prove that all appropriate measures have been taken to limit the use of the already limited use by the court. While the court`s decision may give lenders holding securities that contain false cross-references to existing documents or other errors that may provide certainty that nothing should be done in the current circumstances, it goes without saying that if the effectiveness of a poorly drafted document is left to the discretion of the court, it is important to avoid any (harmless) wording errors. It is easy to see how this happened – a document was reused when a new accession was needed, so that all the errors in the first document were copied into each subsequent instrument of accession. Never expect a document attached to another document to be correct, and lawyers should always avoid simply rewriting a previous document, even if they think the previous document is correct. .