Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a former bank teller, the bank made the right call here. Pay to the order of is like it says pay to the order of. If that was not Mrs. Peter Irrozio (in EXACT name) then the bank did what it was supposed to, it is the person who made the check who messed up.
As a former bank teller, the bank made the right call here. Pay to the order of is like it says pay to the order of. If that was not Mrs. Peter Irrozio (in EXACT name) then the bank did what it was supposed to, it is the person who made the check who messed up.
But hubby wrote "for deposit only". doesn't that make a difference. I have been married 35 years and never officially took my husband's name. I get checks made out to Mrs. John Doe- which I have never gone by but as long as I write Deposit Only on it I've never had any trouble. Now I can see the problem if I tried to cash a check. Seems funny that one bank refused and another one had o problem.
This is standard banking practice. Sorry. Think of it this way, the person the cheque is named for DOES NOT EXIST in documentation by law. And you expect an FDIC-insured, public institution suffering from one million lawsuits and litigation to avoid "sane" banking practice in a dumb fashion???
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,748,461 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by no kudzu
But hubby wrote "for deposit only". doesn't that make a difference. I have been married 35 years and never officially took my husband's name. I get checks made out to Mrs. John Doe- which I have never gone by but as long as I write Deposit Only on it I've never had any trouble. Now I can see the problem if I tried to cash a check. Seems funny that one bank refused and another one had o problem.
No it does not. Technically it goes by "pay to the order of" and that is it. Banks AND credit unions are very strict on this with all the federal regulations we have to follow. Like I said earlier the maker of the checks should have taken this into consideration and made the check out to both parties specifically like John and Jakqueka Doe would have probably been acceptable.
But hubby wrote "for deposit only". doesn't that make a difference. I have been married 35 years and never officially took my husband's name. I get checks made out to Mrs. John Doe- which I have never gone by but as long as I write Deposit Only on it I've never had any trouble. Now I can see the problem if I tried to cash a check. Seems funny that one bank refused and another one had o problem.
So, say someone takes your paycheck out of your mailbox, brings it to their bank, writes "for deposit only" on the back and when questioned by the teller she says "oh I just got married and haven't changed my information yet" and the teller deposits her check. How would you feel about that? I'm pretty sure you would be all over that bank for not requiring proper ID.
Now, it's nice to live in an area where people are allowed to use some discretion but BoA is in the right here and they are doing that to protect YOU.
My DH and I had mutual checking and savings accounts.
When I ran for public office, I opened up a checking account in my name (actually my nickname, as that was what everyone knew me as and what I ran under) for two reasons - it made it easier to deposit the checks, plus it kept my accounting for the race accurate - no "crossovers". Even though the tellers at the bank (BOA) had known me and DH for years, they would deposit checks only in the name-specified account. When I ran my business, the checks were all made out in my nick as well; so in years when I wasn't a candidate, it made it easier to deposit them as well.
When we moved, our new bank (Wells Fargo) opened my account and issued debit cards in DH's name and my - nickname! Because I was well known under my nick, they assumed it was my name; even gave us our house loan under it (many of the supporting documents for the loan were made out in my nickname). Yet, because they know me (and understand the whole 'nick' and 'professional' personas) I can cash or deposit checks made out to either my SSN name or my nick without a problem.
The only time my name change has been a problem is when I was in a flight schedule that covered two days and the airline lost my ID halfway through. I had to have my son fax me my birth certificate to prove who I was for he flight home. The person at the airport said suspiciously, "The last name on this birth certificate doesn't match the last name on the ticket." "Well, no, " I replied, "But then, I wasn't born married to him!"
There are reasons that banks do this; DH has had his identity stolen 3 times. Lots of people, especially people going thru a divorce, can find their accounts cleaned out just because the bank tellers 'know' an individual and lets them do whatever they want; or 'assumes' that a similar name is the same person. Banks have to protect themselves the same as anyone else; and identity fraud is a serious problem.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
