# Third Party Cheque Cashed



## mbrewster (17 Aug 2004)

A third party cheque was cashed at the counter by my local branch without a signature on the back. I realised immediately that the cheque was lost and placed a stop on the cheque. The bank accepted the stop subject to the cheque not already being in the system. They are now offering to refund me half the cheque but I am at a loss for the full amount. Is this reasonable?


----------



## daltonr (17 Aug 2004)

Tell them you'll only accept that offer if they make the CCTV footage of the person who cashed the cheque available, so that you can go to the Gardai.

They obviously know the time the cheque was cashed so it shouldn't be hard to find the right bit of the video.

-Rd


----------



## mbrewster (17 Aug 2004)

They said they cannot tell me the exact time the cheque was cashed and that the CCTV footage does not show who cashed the cheque.


----------



## ainec (17 Aug 2004)

Was the cheque crossed, or who was it made out to?

What I mean is, if you made the cheque out to person A & it was crossed & person B cashed it, then the bank is responsible. 

Even if the cheque was not crossed, without the payee's signature on the back, the bank should never have cashed it. 

Stick to your guns on this one.


----------



## mbrewster (17 Aug 2004)

I do want to stick to my guns but I'm just trying to find out what procedure is.
The cheque was not crossed but was made payable to someone who the bank woould have known. It is a weekly cheque that is made payable to X and is usually cashed by Y. Y did not cash the cheque and stopped it within 10mins of being at the bank when they realised they didn't have the cash. I trust the person in Q as it would not be worth their job! Usually Y is asked to sign the cheque but in this case it didn't happen. The bank have not confirmed to me whether legally they should have got a signature so really thats what I'm trying to check.


----------



## rainyday (17 Aug 2004)

> The cheque was not crossed ...is made payable to X and is usually cashed by Y


To be honest, this sounds like an accident waiting to happen. I don't get the 'known to the bank' issue either - The bank is bound to have temporary staff and new staff in place from time to time - Do you expect them to have pictures of Y at every till?

Just out of curiousity, why would the cheque have been made out to Y? And why wouldn't it have been crossed?


----------



## mbrewster (17 Aug 2004)

The cheque is made payable to Y the business owner (weekly petty cash cheque). We decided not to make it payable to "cash" to avoid anybody cashing it. It is a standard business cheque which has the cross but nothing written between the lines.
The bank are basically telling me that the teller who cashed the cheque is familiar with all our staff and would only have given cash to one of our staff....


----------



## daltonr (17 Aug 2004)

> Y did not cash the cheque and stopped it within 10mins of being at the bank when they realised they didn't have the cash.



I don't get this.  Did they lose the cheque at the bank?
Did they cash it and leave the cash on the counter?
Did they forget to cash it and then lose it after leaving the bank?

-Rd


----------



## zag (17 Aug 2004)

mbrewster - I think you will face a problem because of the ongoing pattern of X cashing a cheque made out to Y.  The bank could easily argue that the teller thought that the person cashing the cheque was Z, a friend of X.

When we need petty cash we make a cheque out to cash and someone from the office goes around to the branch, but we normally make sure that they make a lodgement at the same time so the counter staff know the cash is being given to someone lodging money to the same account.  Only a fool would lodge money to an account they don't control.

However, I think the bank may actually be telling the truth in this case - cheque cashed by someone from the company.  If I found a cheque made out to X on the street, I think the *last* thing to cross my mind would be to chance my arm going into a branch (especially the one it was drawn on where they might know who X was) and trying to cash it unless I also happened to be called X by some strange co-incidence.

Unless of course I know that the branch regularly cash cheques made out to X - and who is most likely to know this information ?  Either someone from the company or from the branch itself.

Now if it was made out to cash and I found it, that would be different . . .


----------



## Elcato (17 Aug 2004)

> The bank are basically telling me that the teller who cashed the cheque is familiar with all our staff and would only have given cash to one of our staff....


So the bank are telling you (and this may not be true don't forget) that someone in your organisation cashed the cheque.


----------



## mbrewster (17 Aug 2004)

Yes the bank are saying a member of staff cashed the cheque. The cheque was cashed supposedly with a lodgement. However I have no reason not to believe the member of staff and I can't believe they would risk their job for such a small amount.


----------



## Elcato (17 Aug 2004)

> However I have no reason not to believe the member of staff and I can't believe they would risk their job for such a small amount.


Now I'm confused. The member of staff you refer to is X (as oppose to the bank clerk) ? So X did not lodge and withdraw. Z did but you don't know the identity of Z and you feel the amount wasn't worth Z's while to cash the cheque and keep it ?? Is someone out sick in the job for a few days which could explain this and have not come forward ? Only explanation I can think of apart from someone who may be leaving anyway and is a bit pi**ed off about something.


----------



## mbrewster (17 Aug 2004)

Yes, X is member of staff who supposedly cashed the cheque while making the lodgement. No other member of staff was at the bank that day and the cctv tapes verify this.
The teller is adamant she gave the cash out to X but X has confirmed to me that she did not cash the cheque.
It was X who informed me and placed the stop on the cheque immediately on their return from the bank.....


----------



## Elcato (17 Aug 2004)

So X lost the cheque on the way to the bank OR X give a lodgement slip and the cheque over the counter but did not receive the cash from the teller. If it's the latter I would explain to the bank that they did not give you the money. The only other explanation is that someone found the cheque and cashed it. Why is the bank willing to pay half in the first place unless they feel slightly responsible.


----------



## IsleOfMan (19 Aug 2004)

*"Or Order"*

This stinks. You make a cheque out to X but expect the bank to cash it for Y.  X should endorse the cheque and so should Y.  Otherwise it should not be cashed by the bank. Both X & Y should be real people.

If the video tapes only show X in the bank then X cashed the cheque and kept the money or lost it and is afraid to say anything. Or the cashier cashed the cheque and kept the money, otherwise their cash balance would show an "over" at the end of the day.   

There are two words after where you insert the payee's name on every cheque and they are "or order". So if the cheque is payable to X, then X can pass this cheque on to someone else and the bank should only cash it on presentation of I.D. and endorsement by Y.


----------



## ParkLane (19 Aug 2004)

*Two things to do.*

"They cannot tell me the exact time the cheque was cashed".

Maybe not but they should be able to get pretty close. I understand that most cashiers are "online" so to speak and cash the cheque against the account when presented. If not online then cashed cheques are held in the teller area and then passed back to the "batch" area throughout the day. It should be possible to identify within a reasonable time frame when it was cashed. Crossed cheques should not be cashed but then if you asked the bank to cash crossed cheques then you cannot hold them responsible when they do. 

Why did you wait so long to put a stop on the cheque? When your staff member returned to your office did you not check to see if he/she had the petty cash. If this was a regular occurence it is strange that your staff member didn't notice that he/she didn't have the petty cash. I mean they only had to do two things. Make a lodgment and bring the petty cash back to the office.


----------



## unreg (20 Aug 2004)

*Third Party*

Sorry I am alarmed here, if I write a cheque for say Timmy which is crossed as most bank cheques are printed that way , can someone else then take Timmys cheque, sign the back of it and then lodge it into their own account, surely not?

If that is the case then all business cheques should be strictly account payee only.

Basically we are saying that if find a cheque in the street , sign the made "payable name" on the back by endorsing it I can stick it into what ever account I like?

Thats sounds very, very loose indeed. 

Ok i know eventually who ever is missing the cheque will come looking but they might never get their money back


----------



## Tintagel (20 Aug 2004)

*Passport or Driving licence.*

During the bank strike of 1970 (lasted six months) and 1976 it was commonplace to pass cheques on in repayment of debt. XtoYtoZtoAtoB and so on. Each owner of the cheque became a holder in due course, endorsed it and then passed it on. When the banks eventually opened after the strike they were looking at the last person to hold the cheque, they couldn't vouch for the previous owners of the cheque. Once they were satisfied with the eventual owner, that they had cleared the cheque and checked against stops on the cheque they could pay value against it.

In the above case, did the bank know who they were cashing the check for and was the cheque endorsed by the payee, the eventual owner and did they check I.D. 

Remember when you try to open an account with a bank you are asked for photographic I.D. and utility bill. It is strange that they would just cash a cheque for a stranger?


----------

