Bank tried to stop me lodging a sole payee cheque to a joint account

Daisy2012 said:
Sorry Gulliver - I don't see how there is a change of title. ...
Click to expand...

If a cheque is payable to Daisy2012, then Daisy2012 has sole title to it. If the cheque is paid into a joint account then there is a change of ownership - Daisy2012 no longer has sole title to it, or to the proceeds for as long as the funds are in the joint account.

This principle stands regardless of whether there exists a "payable to either" mandate on the account
 
Sorry to be pedantic, Gulliver, but this is really getting me. Where does it say that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only means that the payee has sole title to the proceeds? I can not find any terms and conditions anywhere that state that lodging an a/c payee only cheque into an account in the payee's name must be endorsed by the payee if that account is a joint account.

Is there case law, perhaps, not available to regular people?

And is the bank not required to state this in their terms and conditions?
 
Where does it say that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only means that the payee has sole title to the proceeds?
Click to expand...
That is why someone puts the name of the person on a cheque. If they did not do so, then it would be in effect a bearer cheque and whoever was in possession of it, could cash it.

I don't know if I am allowed to make out a cheque saying "Pay anyone" or "pay the bearer". But if I say pay "Daisy 2012" then obviously only Daisy 2012 should get the money, even if John Dory finds it.

Daisy can endorse the back of it, which makes it a bearer cheque. It can be lodged into any account.

If I cross it "A/c payee only" then Daisy can't endorse it and must cash it herself or lodge it to her own account. Check out Wikipedia for more on crossing cheques.
 
Daisy2012 said:
Sorry to be pedantic, Gulliver, but this is really getting me. Where does it say that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only means that the payee has sole title to the proceeds? ...
Click to expand...

By definition (Bills of Exchange Act, to which I referred you earlier) the payee of a cheque has sole title to that cheque - even if that cheque is uncrossed.

Laws are drafted for general applicability. No parliamentary draughtsman is going to insert a clause governing the circumstance of the niece of a payee attempting to lodge an unendorsed cheque to an joint account to which the payee and his spouse are parties.
 
Cheques are becoming rarer and rarer and this is why this still does not make sense to me.

The payee on the cheque has sole title of the cheque (absolutely accepted) and it can only be lodged into an account in the name of the payee. If there is an additional name on the account that is irrelevant to the title of the cheque.

That just means that the payee has given full access to the funds in that account to the joint account holder. It in no way obfuscates or changes the title of the cheque.

Whether it's my niece or anyone else lodging the cheque is also irrelevant. The cheque in the name of the payee is being lodged into an account in the name of the payee. It is and should be irrelevant who actually puts the thing into an envelope and hands it into the bank. I have, by the way, checked out wikipedia and googled like mad and gone through all sorts of documents. And I can't find anywhere other than a few threads like this on the odd forum in Ireland (not anywhere else) where someone has had the same issue as I.

I guess nobody is going to be able to convince me... so probably time to quit on this.
 
Hi Daisy

You have a blind spot, so it's worth trying to deal with it.

Let's say A & B own a company. They are not related. They are not involved in any way except that they own a limited company which owns a corner shop. Either can sign a cheque on the company's account.

The only cheques which can be lodged to that account are cheques made payable to corner shop ltd. If I buy something in that shop I can pay for it with a cheque from X made payable to Brendan. But Corner Shop ltd would want me to endorse the cheque so that they could lodge it to their account.

Does that help in any way?
 
Thanks Brendan, but no, not really.

That's an instance of a cheque made out to Brendan not being paid into an account in the name of Brendan.

Also, I don't think the Corner Shop could lodge it to their account, as (certainly in the case of my business accounts) the bank will only allow me to lodge cheques to Daisy Ltd account that are made out to Daisy Ltd. They won't accept cheques made out to Daisy2012 even with endorsement. They have big signs up all over the bank to say so as well....
 
Daisy, forget about the 50K already in the account. That money already belongs to both of you and has no bearing on the situation. Also forget any favours they've been doing for you for years; it could have been due to staff inexperience or poor communication from HQ.

When you strip it down, it's straightforward surely?

Would you expect to be allowed to ask a bank to electronically transfer money from your husbands sole account to your joint account without his approval?

There is absolutely no difference between this and what you were attempting to do here.
 
Darag, no, I wouldn't. However, when revenue make a repayment to my husband electronically it's paid into our joint account. When I receive my salary it's paid into our joint account electronically.

You are not comparing like with like. You are suggesting that I think I should have the authority to debit funds from his sole account to our joint account.

The issue is over the terms and conditions of lodging a cheque into a joint account. If there is a condition that an a/c payee cheque made out to a single person must be endorsed before it can be lodged into a joint account bearing the name of the payee, then I would like to know about it. This is why I have said that I will write to the bank and get the situation clarified.
 
It's simple, and no matter how many houses you go around, the matter remains a simple one: only the payee of a cheque has the right to negotiate a cheque unless and until that payee endorses that cheque to give the right of negotiation to another person. It's there in the Bills of Exchange Act.

All other interpretations, all history, the existence of joint accounts, the possession of lots of money, whatever, are red herrings.

When you say: "If there is a condition that an a/c payee cheque made out to a single person must be endorsed before it can be lodged into a joint account bearing the name of the payee, then I would like to know about it" you are being disingenuous. You have been told about it. You just don't accept what you have been told.
 
Daisy, when you arranged to have your salary paid to the joint account, you authorized the transfers to the joint account. Similarly when your husband arranged to collect a refund from revenue, he authorized them to pay the money to the joint account.

The principle is the exact same. To transfer the value of a cheque which can solely be presented by your husband to the joint account requires his authorization.
 
Padraigb said:
When you say: "If there is a condition that an a/c payee cheque made out to a single person must be endorsed before it can be lodged into a joint account bearing the name of the payee, then I would like to know about it" you are being disingenuous. You have been told about it. You just don't accept what you have been told.
Click to expand...

No PadraigB, I am not being disingenuous. I am not accepting what you are telling me. I do not accept that the title of the cheque has changed. You pointed me to the Bills of Exchange act which does not say that a cheque being paid into an account in the name of the payee and a.n.other must be endorsed. The bills of exchange act says that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only must be paid into an account in the name of the payee. It refers to cheques being endorsed if they are being paid into an account that is not in the name of the payee.

When we opened the joint account we were asked to authorise whether one of us singly or both of us together would be able to transact on the account.

Common practise has been for the past 20 years that we have had the joint account that a cheque made out to either one of us has been lodged by either one of us or anyone else who happens to be passing by the bank.

I popped back in here to correct my last post, but darag got there faster. As yes, absolutely, I have named the bank account into which my salary is transferred electronically, so it's not the same thing as lodging a cheque to it.

However, darag, you also say "To transfer the value of a cheque which can solely be presented by your husband to the joint account requires his authorization. " That is not my understanding of a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only. There is no requirement on a cheque to be presented by the named owner. A cheque can be lodged by anyone so long as it is being lodged to the account of the payee if it is crossed a/c payee only.

Again, I am going to write to the bank and have them tell me that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only may only be lodged to a joint account on which the payee is named if it is endorsed by the payee.
 
Daisy2012 said:
The bills of exchange act says that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only must be paid into an account in the name of the payee.
Click to expand...
The payee is Mr Daisy. The payee is not 'Mr & Mrs Daisy'
Daisy2012 said:
It refers to cheques being endorsed if they are being paid into an account that is not in the name of the payee.
Click to expand...
The account is in the name of 'Mr & Mrs Daisy'. The account is not in the name of Mr Daisy.

Payee name (Mr) is not the same as account name (Mr & Mrs) therefore the cheque must be endorsed. I think the nub of your confusion is the "must be paid into an account in the name of the payee" bit - you think that if your husband's name is part of the account name then that counts as 'in the name of'. It doesn't. The account is not in the payee's name - it is in the names of two people.
 
Daisy2012 said:
... The bills of exchange act says that a cheque which is crossed a/c payee only must be paid into an account in the name of the payee. ...
Click to expand...

It does not, but hey, let's not worry about the facts.

You should read S.41 of the Act. That's the relevant one.
 
Daisy2012 said:
Sorry Gulliver - I don't see how there is a change of title. AC Payee only does not mean pay into an account with only the name of the payee on it. It means it must be paid into an account in the name of the payee and does not restrict that account to be in only the name of the payee.

For example, with my business account I have two separate accounts : No 1 account and No 2 account. When I receive a cheque made out to MSDaisy2012 Ltd I am free to lodge it into MSDaisy2012 Ltd No 1 A/C or MSDaisy2012 Ltd No 2 A/C

@Slim - they were a bit :) but then again I was probably a bit discourteous myself... and I'm a big girl now...
Click to expand...

Your business accounts are in the name of MSDaisy2012 Ltd.

No 1 A/C and No 2 A/C are mere designations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top