not allowed lodge crossed cheques into joint account ?

M

Midsummer

Registered User
Messages
112
Hi - I just wanted to relate something that happened in the bank today - I was lodging cheques into a joint account; 2 in my name 1 in husband's name. The teller said I couldn't lodge the husband's cheque (revenue tax refund) because he hadn't signed the back. I assumed he thought it was my sole account they were going into so I said no it's a joint account. He insisted he couldn't lodge it as it said "a/c payee only" on it etc. I argued that it's going into his account so that's fine. Anyway I asked for a manager and he said "just go to customer services" (huge queue) - I said I'm not moving etc. so he got a customer services manager.

Anyway she repeated the same thing saying that "unless the account holder is present and lodges the cheque into their own account it must be signed on the back". I argued that I had never heard of this etc. She said "it's on the financial regulator's website". So anyway I just lodged my 2 cheques and left.

I looked up the financial regulator's website - so sign anywhere so I rang them. V. helpful person took my query and put me on hold - basically said that even her more senior colleagues hadn't heard of this rule and that really I should have been able to lodge my husband's crossed cheque into our joint account etc. She also said that no it's not on the website & she hadn't heard of any new ruling regarding it. She gave me the bank's customer care number.

So I rang them and they backed up what their branch had done (of course) and said that yes there was a new rule on it.

My query is - surely "a/c payee only" covers joint accounts ? I'm sure it can be interpreted either way really as even the regulator doesn't have a definition. Very annoying from a customer services point of view though.

There were no signs anywhere advising of the new rule and I guarantee if I had just put them in the express lodgement like I was going to in the beginning I wouldn't have had all the hassle that followed !

The gas thing was the teller then said "do you still want to lodge these cheques ?" - as if I was just going to storm out and open an account somewhere else immediately...LOL.

I am tempted to write to the manager of the branch about it but I'm sure I'll just get a standard "we're right actually" reply.
 
Midsummer said:
So I rang them and they backed up what their branch had done (of course) and said that yes there was a new rule on it.
Click to expand...

Can you get the bank to confirm what the actual rule wording is, where it written, who issued it and under what legislation?
 
I rang them again and apparently it's not a new rule - it's just being enforced more strictly now. They couldn't give me any other information on it. I'm sure they're right it's just annoying more than anything.
 
I had a similar situation recently. She told me the situation, I mentioned how strange that I couldn't lodge a cheque into our own account when it was made payable to one of the account holders. Her answer was "its not strange if you understood the rules" - boy did that make me feel stupid!!
Thanks to the nice friendly staff in Bank Of Ireland!
 
:) how could you not know the rules !! Same bank - it must be just a new policy and enforcement of an old rule. Pity they couldn't put up a few signs or something to save the embarrassment of customers before they train their staff !
 
It's the usual case of "computer says no". It's widespread in the banking sector. I think they get brainwashed during induction to stop using their common sense.
 
The same thing has happened to me and to be honest I can understand the bank's position. The cheque is made out to the other party and crossed. If you're allowed lodge it you can withdraw the funds immediately which shouldn't happen. Obviously in practice this is a pain in the neck as it can mean extra trips to the bank but there is logic behind it.
 
there is logic behind it.
Click to expand...
yes I can understand esp. if there was a marital dispute relating to a joint account that the bank wasn't aware of - but I just think they should warn customers before moving the goalposts !
 
I just avoid this situation by lodging these cheques (well, all cheques really) via express lodgement. Never, ever, ever had one returned to me in this way. In practical terms the people doing the processing just couldn't be bothered to go to all the trouble of whatever it is that is involved in returning the cheque when it patently is destined for that account, but someone at a counter can just hand it back to you.

John Rambo - does a cheque made out to "Joe Murphy & Mary Murphy" and lodged to a joint account in that name have to be endorsed by the person who is not present at the lodging ?

z
 
lodging these cheques (well, all cheques really) via express lodgement
Click to expand...
oh I wish I had today - I usually do but I decided there was a small risk they would go missing and as they were big enough I queued up to take the grief in person... I agree though I'm sure it would have gone through no problem that way.
 
I had the same problem lodging wife's cheque having done it several times previously without incident. New guidelines I was told. I think their reasoning is I could lodge Mrs twofor1's cheque into our joint A/c, possibly without her knowing, then as it's a joint A/c I could then draw on it. And/or she might not have wanted to lodge that cheque to our joint A/c.

In my case it was an express lodgement, they phoned me to return and collect it and said she had to sign the back of the cheque, or if she had signed the lodgement slip that would have been acceptable too.
 
twofor1 said:
In my case it was an express lodgement, they phoned me to return and collect it and said she had to sign the back of the cheque, or if she had signed the lodgement slip that would have been acceptable too.
Click to expand...
The solution is to express lodge and write your spouse's name in the "lodged by" space. That's what I do and they haven't refused my (or rather my wife's) money yet.
 
Midsummer said:
...The teller said I couldn't lodge the husband's cheque (revenue tax refund) because he hadn't signed the back...
Click to expand...
Take all the pain, queuing, obscure rules, signatures and frustration out of the equation, give Revenue the account details, they'll lodge it directly with husband's PPSN as part of the transaction reference (so you'll know whose money it REALLY is :rolleyes:).
 
Lodged cheque made out to Hubby into joint account via Express Lodgement as I have been doing since Express Lodgement was invented. It was returned by post for his signature. Had a word with a friend who worked in B of I for 30 years (not in public office). He says it's correct procedure and should have been enforced years ago.

By the way if Hubby went into B of I they would probably ask him for I D. Don't think he has been inside that door in a very long time
 
Hmm, looks like they are 'tightening up', after a fashion.

I may have to resort to what has been suggested above by oysterman - write Lodged by Mrs Z McFlanagan O'Loonasy when lodging one of her cheques and Lodged by Mr Z O'Loonasy when lodging one of mine. If I have to lodge a joint cheque then the lodged by details might need a sheet all of their own.

z
 
I dont think this is a new thing as i have seen this six or seven years ago, maybe they should have been enforcing this all along.
 
Had a similar issue with 1 BOI branch. My 2 yr old son received a low value crossed cheque at Christmas. My wife and I have a joint account with BOI. I brought cheque and his birth cert (to prove it was being lodged to his parents a/c) to one BOI branch and they refused it. They tried to get me to open a Child saver account for him.

Went to a different branch of BoI some days later and it was lodged over the counter without issue...and they didn't ask to see birth cert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top