PIF Notes on Checks
Date: Fri, 10/05/2012 - 07:44
I have started some research on this, partially because I suddenly remembered it from business law. It is about putting Paid in Full on your checks in final payments that are in dispute. It basically states if the person receiving the check cashes or deposits the check and when it clears the bank, debt is in fact paid in full.
The general statue is : ACCORD AND SATISFACTION BY USE OF INSTRUMENT
If anyone has information this could be very helpful to all here. As I research more and get some answers back from some questions I have asked I will put here.
But it looks to be legal and binding.
The general statue is : ACCORD AND SATISFACTION BY USE OF INSTRUMENT
If anyone has information this could be very helpful to all here. As I research more and get some answers back from some questions I have asked I will put here.
But it looks to be legal and binding.
It is called restrictive endorsement and it not valid. For the
It is called restrictive endorsement and it not valid.
For the restrictive check endorsement to work , there must be a mutual decision between the creditor/agency and the debtor. Most, if not all states now have a Safe Harbor under the UCC code for just such situations. The Safe Harbor was basically created to protect creditors who may have automated processing of checks and gives them the opportunity to refund the check back to the debtor within 90 days of cashing it.
