Ever hear of this banking policy?

[LeslieG]

My husband took a check into our bank yesterday. It was made payable to a friend of his who signed the check. The friend gave it to my husband to cash, so my husband signed his name underneath his friend's. The bank refused to cash it saying they had to physically see the first person sign the check.

I have never heard of anything like that. I was always taught that once the person whose name was on the check signed it, you had to be very careful with the check, because whoever signed underneath would be able to cash the check.

 

[AmandaRG]

My husband took a check into our bank yesterday. It was made payable to a friend of his who signed the check. The friend gave it to my husband to cash, so my husband signed his name underneath his friend's. The bank refused to cash it saying they had to physically see the first person sign the check.

I have never heard of anything like that. I was always taught that once the person whose name was on the check signed it, you had to be very careful with the check, because whoever signed underneath would be able to cash the check.

I think it is a good policy. There is so much identity theft and fraud these days. I'm guessing the banks have to be more cautious.

 

[HappyDznyCamper]

My husband took a check into our bank yesterday. It was made payable to a friend of his who signed the check. The friend gave it to my husband to cash, so my husband signed his name underneath his friend's. The bank refused to cash it saying they had to physically see the first person sign the check.

I have never heard of anything like that. I was always taught that once the person whose name was on the check signed it, you had to be very careful with the check, because whoever signed underneath would be able to cash the check.

How would the bank teller know if the signature was genuine?? In that situation the check should be deposited into your account, or at least cashed against your account. If the check is returned by the drawn on back the money is removed from your account). So if you had enough balance in your account they could have cashed it, if not deposit and wait for it to clear.

 

[Swimalie]

I think it is a good policy. There is so much identity theft and fraud these days. I'm guessing the banks have to be more cautious.

I agree. I believe the friend could have written something like "payable to (your husband's name) and then the bank might accept it.

 

[LeslieG]

I'll have to ask him whether they discussed depositing it into our account and whether they also refused to do that. I'm wondering if this is something all banks are doing, or just a policy adopted by this particular bank.

 

[NikiM20]

At our credit union this has never been allowed unless it is your minor child the check is made out to. This has been the policy in the 10 plus years we have been members.

 

[wtrmlnlabs]

We had that problem with a bank around here. They would not deposit or cash the check we "signed over" to someone else. We ended up having to take it to our bank and cash it. We asked our bank about it and they said they don't have that policy, so I think it's just something certain banks are doing. That's why I always sign the backs of our check with "for deposit only".

 

[mrseace711]

it is a must! Unfortunatly theres too much fraud out there and tellers are responsible for the checks they take. Without these policies banks would lose even more $. Im sure it was nothing personal against your husband, they can not bend the policy for one customer and then tell the next NO. Rules are rules and they protect both the customer and the bank

 

[Disneychix]

My bank will not allow you to cash a check that's made out to someone else and it's even difficult to cash a check made out to my infant DS. I had to physically write how old he was underneath where I signed (4months!).

 

[RachaelA]

I've only been allowed to do it when the person had the same last name as me (ie: I cashed a check for my little brother).

 

[ah1126]

This is pretty common. It is to protect the banks against signature fraud. When you bring in a check that has already been signed, they have no idea who signed it. I worked in a bank for a few years and this was our policy. The bank we bank at is the same. They won't even cash a check made out to and signed by my husband if I try to cash it.

 

[Styx Fan]

I worked as a bank teller in the late '80's and early 90's and we would not have cashed that check even back then. Anybody could have signed that check, there is no way to know. Writing "payable to....." wouldn't change that.

We would also have people bring in a signed check along with the signers ID. usually we still wouldn't cash it. How did we know they really were acting on the signers behalf?

About the only thing we could do was deposit the 2nd endorsed check into the account of the person in front of us and place a hold for the amount of the check on their account to allow it to clear.

As someone else said, tellers are held responsible for the checks they cash/deposit. You cash a stolen check and you are out a job if you have not followed all the policies to the letter.

 

[4HppyCamprs]

I worked as a teller until 2007 and no we would not take a third party check. In the event that the payee was a minor then the endorsement would have to reflect that. A check is on essence a contract.

 

[Marionnette]

I haven't seen a bank do that since I was a teenager. Too much fraud. My bank wouldn't even deposit a government check that was made out to both me and my husband because the account was only in my name. I had to add him to the account and he had to come in and sign a signature card in front of a bank officer.

Sorry it didn't work out for you OP, but it's a regular practice around here and has been for quite some time.

 

[cseca]

Our bank wouldn't do it either. The reason I was told is since 9/11 the banks had to tightened up security and that includes not accepting 3rd party checks. In our bank if we receive a check with 2 names, to cash it both parties have to be present to sign the checks. Unless the check is deposited into an acct with BOTH parties listed as holders then they don't require both people to be present.

 

[mjkacmom]

My bank will not allow you to cash a check that's made out to someone else and it's even difficult to cash a check made out to my infant DS. I had to physically write how old he was underneath where I signed (4months!).

My bank (chase) won't allow me to to cash a check made out to someone else, except for my children, and I have to indicate MINOR. If it's made out to DH, I have to deposit it (both of our names are on the account).

 

[johde]

Last time I tried to cash a 3rd part check was back in the 80's when I was in college. A friend of mine didn't have an account in town. He was with me, and they cashed it, but even then they told me it was not standard practice and I shouldn't try and do it again. So, even then it was frowned upon.

 

[Janepod]

This is a longtime rule. When my mom was teaching me how to balance my checkbook, how to fill out a deposit slip, etc. in the early 1980s, this was part of her lesson. I'm glad it's the rule - there are so many opportunities for check fraud and identity theft; hopefully this makes a dent in those crimes.

 

[debrapagliasotti]

We live in a pretty small town and our local bank allowed my DH to do this. My DH purchased some items for an auction at work which several of his co workers were supposed to split the cost...one person made the check out to the guy running the auction, where it should've been made out to DH, so the check was just signed over to DH. All 3 parties involved live here in town, so I dont know if that made any difference or not in our bank allowing this.