I wrote a post-dated check to be cashed in 5 days. The guy that cashed it, cashed it before the date and overbalanced my account. I tried to make the responsible for the money and they said it was against the law to write a post-dated check. Is this true?Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Asked on 4:08 pm Sep 12th 2008
Anonymous
 |
| 0 |
 |
just my little input :) i have seen banks and companies with notices saying they deposit checks when recieved, they do not look at the date.. my car insurance company states that when making payments.. i think a lot of places where i live honor that?My new blog.. on trying to get out of debt, making extra money online, just little things I have picked up along the way... http://what-shoulda-been.blogspot.com Updated regularly :) Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 6:20 am Mar 24th 2010
|
| 0 |
|
[QUOTE=Anonymous;671117]However, I doubt you'd be "willing to cover any NSF/OD fees" when it causes an avalanche. [/quote]
Unfortunately, I've had to (Not regarding post-dated checks though)... Off topic but on that subject, we offer ACH payments to our customers, and maybe 1/3 of our customers sign up for us to automatically withdraw the payment every month. There is an ACH module for our loan software that automates the processing and interacts with the bank, but it costs about $25K that my boss is not willing to spend. And so we have to go to our bank's website and manually enter all the ACH payments every day, and then make a "batch" out of it, which gets released to our bank and then the customer's bank for withdrawal. Well, our bank's website is slow, horrible, and "time's out" a lot. Sometimes the website will "trick" my staff into thinking a batch was not created, so they press "submit" again, and unknowingly release the same batch twice. Which then ends up taking two payments from our customer's bank account. I never happen to find out until the next morning when I've got several customers asking for a manager and screaming my ear off that we took two payments.
Needless to say, in a situation like that we are obviously at fault and 1) have to put a payment back, and 2) compensate the customer for any NSF/OD fees they are charged as a result. My worst single hit was having to pay $35 x 12 NSFs that we caused to one customer. But considering that a batch error affects many customers, I've had to pay out as much as $1000 combined among all affected customers.
BUT my example aside, I share your sentiment regarding bank NSF/OD fees. One small problem easily snowballs into lots and lots of fees, for which the banks ultimately garner huge returns at the sake of their customer's paycheck. (Hence why so many banks give free checking [I][U]as long as[/U][/I] you set up direct deposit with your payroll.)
[QUOTE]More to the point, in your opinion, or anyone else who would like to pipe in, should the honoring bank be liable charges incurred?[/QUOTE] Well, the honoring bank is really only doing so at their depositor's request. Keeping in mind that more and more places are turning to check-scanning and electronic conversion, the bank itself is playing a lesser and lesser role in the actual handling of that check. For example, we just got a check scanner last month -- no more making deposits at the bank, we scan the checks and the bank takes our deposit electronically. In that case, the bank has no control or option to reject that check from the deposit. Liability really lies with the payee of that check, in my opinion, because the person who is actually depositing/cashing that check should be aware of the date.
[QUOTE]Should the debtor's bank be limited in the amount of charges assessed? [/QUOTE]New laws were just passed for the credit cards that only allow one over-limit fee per billing cycle (as opposed to the past where they could charge a fee for each transaction over-limit). I would love to see the same sort of laws enacted for banks.
Just looking at the cause for delinquency on my own loan accounts, many of my customers end up in a situation where they cannot pay me because their bank has taken their whole paycheck in fees.
This is a different world than in the past "when people knew how to keep a checkbook" and they only wrote checks for "bills" (versus using a debit card to pay for everything). When I was in school, I remember having to take consumer education, where they taught us how to balance a checking account. Who actually does that anymore? More and more people are living paycheck to paycheck, and putting everything on their debit card -- in combination with that they either can't or don't keep track of their bank balance. And then the bank eats them alive, and that's what the banks want to happen. It seriously does need to stop!
[QUOTE]Should two competing banks be expected to work together to minimize the risk and damages for their respective customers? [/QUOTE]
Well, it's a real doozy when the customer's bank charges a $35 NSF -- and then the company the wrote the NSF check to also charges them another $25. Enter "re-deposits" and if the check bounces a second time, then there 2 more fees. I would like to say only one bank can charge a fee, whether it's the customer's bank or the payee's bank.
Another story from me though.... I had a customer who had written us a check that bounced. Accordingly, we charged the customer an NSF fee. It turns out the the customer's bank had erred and caused several of her checks to bounce, that should have cleared. The customer's bank called me, admitted fault, and asked if I would be willing to waive our NSF fee. Subsequently and ironically, the customer's bank was the same bank that my company uses. So I said the the customer service rep, "Just so you know, we use [name of bank] too, and you charged me an NSF fee too when that check bounced. If you waive the NSF fee you charged me, then I'll waive it for the customer." Well, she stated that she had no authority to waive an NSF fee on a commercial account. So I told her I would not waive mine either, then. The bank ended up sending me a check to cover the customer's NSF fee, which really only went to pay themselves back for the fee that they charged me.
Moral of my story, though, is that banks really should be willing to work with each other and at least waive some fees when it starts getting ridiculous.
[QUOTE]
Regardless of the experienced person's take on it, is there a need for better, or rather more transparent laws regarding postdated checks?
[/QUOTE]
Personally, I would see this as a problem that affects such a small percentage of the overall transactions as to be negligible. Obviously there is a public outcry from those in a situation like yourself, who has had a check deposited prematurely and sustained damages as result. And I'm not saying that you don't have a valid beef.... I don't see a need for "mass overhaul" or sweeping post-dated check reform, but I wouldn't be opposed to a law that creates liability for the person who deposits a post-dated check early.
[QUOTE]
Should the landlord have any liability in the above example (as I think that it was pretty clear that he had deliberately violated the 'verbal' agreement)?
[/QUOTE] I do believe so, and I've already stated that I and my company already voluntarily cover any costs incurred if we accidentally deposit a check too soon.
HOWEVER considering that payment processing centers (I'll define as any office that processes 50+ payments per day), has no reasonable means to intercept every possible post-dated check that might come in the mail, and remove it from the regular "flow" of operations -- a company should not be held liable if a customer sends a post-dated check by mail to that processing center's "regular" payment address.
[QUOTE]
Under current laws, that would be a civil matter, not criminal, but should it be criminal fraud? Of course, you can probably guess my answers to the above questions, I just dedicated a half hour of writing in support, but it'd be interesting to see it from the point of view of someone on the banking side of things.
[/QUOTE]
Well I wouldn't go that far! If it would become criminal to deposit post-dated check prematurely, then I'll also say that the states should also enforce the bad-check laws already in place and incarcarate anybody who writes an NSF check or check drawn on a closed account, because technically that is considered fraud as well. But anybody here will tell you that the cops are too busy chasing after murderers and rapists to care about someone who writes a bad check.
Well that was long-winded! Now that I've written novel..... I'm going to watch some TV. Enjoyed the conversation!Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 7:41 pm Mar 24th 2010
|
| 0 |
|
Question, I received a ticket in a semi,for driving in excess of 55 mph.The court sent me paperwork ,saying I need to post the bail amount of 455.00 to go to court to fight the ticket.! dated a check for the date of my court hearing for full amount.I found out 3 days ago thay cashed the check.20 days early.what the hell is that legal.This is from our lovily state of California.I guess thay really do need money.Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 11:15 am May 7th 2010
Anonymous
|
| 0 |
|
There's no such thing as a post-dated check. Some banks won't cash it, but most places treat a check as instant cash so whenever you write it, you are responsible for the funds. Whenever you write a cash you are telling them that they can take money from your account in that amount on the check so writing bad checks can get you in trouble very, very quickly.Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 7:16 am May 28th 2010
|
| 0 |
|
actually, writing a post dated check is not against the law. Also, a bank is suppose to by law cash post dated checks when received even though some might refuse it is against the law. The only time they could refuse to cash a post dated check is when the writer of the check notified the bank in advance not to cash the check..Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 2:45 pm Aug 11th 2010
Anonymous
|
| 0 |
|
Here's a new spin for this one. I have automated bill bay to a local orthodonist. It's set to pay for the first of every month. Since it's a small business and electronic bill pay doesn't work, the bank writes them a check each month. That said, the BANK post-dates the check and sends it several days, or maybe a week early. Then the business deposits the check and the bank, the same one that post-dates the check, cashes it two to three days early. On two ocassions over the last year this resulted in NSF charges, since my payroll didn't deposit until the next day. I was going to go to the bank tomorrow and try to recoup the NSF charges. Do I have a leg to stand on?Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 5:08 pm Aug 31st 2010
Anonymous
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
It would be great to see new laws supporting post dated checks. They can be incredibly useful. For the last three years I've been renting a condo with my fiancé and we give our landlord a stack of post dated checks at the beginning of every lease. That way we never have to think about the rent and she is happy. She ALWAYS cashes after the date that is on the check. I guess we got lucky with that. It is one of the few reasons why we have not tried to move into a house yet. We are afraid if we do, we might not get so lucky and have to deal with the hassle of mailing out payments. Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 7:46 am Oct 23rd 2011
Anonymous
|
| 0 |
|
My question is this- If a company can cash a post-dated check, then how come the bank won't cash a paycheck dated for the next day??? Doesn't make much since. It's the same thing.
Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 7:58 am Nov 10th 2011
Nik
|
| 0 |
|
I have a question, what if it is a mortgage and there is 23 cheques needed so to save on banking fees as they make to much monies already. If the person who the cheques went to depoited them on the correct date what is the problem...
Reason for Editing (Minimum 15 Characters)
Answered on 8:33 am Dec 14th 2011
Anonymous
Write Your AnswerWrite Your Name: |
|
