how has this cheque gone through?

windym_2

From the British Bankers Association:

"The date of a cheque is important. If it is missing the bank may either insert it or refuse payment. An undated cheque can be valid but sometimes, depending on the circumstances, the bank will return it with the ?date required' marked on it. So remember to always fill in the date.

If the date on the cheque is more than 6 months before the date that you pay in/or present the cheque at your bank, the bank may return it marked ?out of date'.

Sometimes customers 'post-date' a cheque. This is a date in the future and essentially means that the customer intends that the bank will not pay the cheque earlier than the date inserted on the cheque. If a post-dated cheque is paid in before the date on the cheque the bank may pay it or return it marked ?post-dated'. Most banks do not encourage post-dating cheques. You should be careful to ensure that a post-dated cheque is not presented to a bank before the date on the cheque. Some banks state in their terms and conditions that they will pay a post dated cheque on first presentation if the cheque is otherwise in order."

Mark7799

NAR wrote:

So, on a similar vein, it would be very easy for a post dated cheque to go through the system a few days early? This happened recently to a Club I belong to, where a cheque was dated 1st October, but was presented and cleared on 28th September. The Club didn't want the cheque (although funds available) to go through until October as that was the start of their new financial year. Should the bank not have rejected it?

Same applies as to the unsigned cheque. The banks do not check every single cheque for errors and incorrect cheques can (and do) get through the system. This should also be a note of caution for anyone trying to cheat the system (NOT IMPLYING ANYONE IN THIS THREAD HAS DONE SO) by making a payment with a spoiled cheque - this is likely to go through and you will end up paying.

Savvy_Sue

NAR wrote:

So, on a similar vein, it would be very easy for a post dated cheque to go through the system a few days early? This happened recently to a Club I belong to, where a cheque was dated 1st October, but was presented and cleared on 28th September. The Club didn't want the cheque (although funds available) to go through until October as that was the start of their new financial year. Should the bank not have rejected it?

The only way to be sure a post-dated cheque isn't presented or cleared early is to hang onto it until the date after which you're happy for it to go through.

When the accounts are checked at end of year whoever is auditing should know how to 'carry forward' this payment to next financial year.

canny_yorkshireman_2

Hmm think angel has a valid point here and a point of law would be that the cheque unsigned is not legal tender and so should be returned but as the banks do not heve the resources to scrutinise evry cheque then it is accepted practice to process this which does nothing to re assure the public that the industry is fighting fraud in every corner

dunstonh

canny_yorkshireman wrote:

Hmm think angel has a valid point here and a point of law would be that the cheque unsigned is not legal tender and so should be returned but as the banks do not heve the resources to scrutinise evry cheque then it is accepted practice to process this which does nothing to re assure the public that the industry is fighting fraud in every corner

And returning a cheque for £12.95 for non signature will cause as much irritation to the retailer, who could then be within their rights to charge the consumer interest for non payment. Thats if they can find the consumer.

Also, although the legal stance may be one thing, the ombudsman has rejected complaints where cheques have been paid but have not contained the signature of the account holder, where the account holder was aware of the transaction or had given permission for someone else to sign on their behalf.

There has to be a sense of reality here. A bill was due and was paid. The fact the cheque wasnt signed is really a non-issue. Nice debating point but nothing can come from it.

Bossyboots

It is concerning that the Boots employee has taken the cheque without checking the signature against the cheque guarantee card. I would be more worried about that as this sort of lapse makes us vulnerable to theft from our accounts if your cheque book falls into the wrong hands.

I recently handed over my husband's credit card for a transaction and then had to sign for it as the chip and pin wasn't working. It was only 20 minutes later, when we got home, that I realised what I had done. The transaction went through as his card number and mine are the same so my card provider won't be any the wiser but I did report the incident to the store to make them aware of their lax security checking.

angelcake

3 years ago I worked in the clearing department of Lloydstsb! I was born in 1980 so am quite sure it wasn't then! :rolleyes:

I wish I hadn't bothered even asking now! Think I just wanted someone else to tell me it was wrong.

Nevermind

Jay-Jay_4

Hi Angel,

Apologies if this is duplicate posting, I've scanned the other posts but not read all of them in detail.

The machines that you say should read all the details are the optical readers. They read the amount and the encoded details on the bottom. The only reason that words and figures, date, payee or sigs would be checked is if there was a problem and the cheque needed repairing (manually inputting). That would only be done if the credit didn't balance or if the cheque is folded obscuring the encoding/figures.

It's a bummer that it went through but it does happen a lot. If there had been a problem then the cheque could be stopped or refunded even at this stage, so you're still covered against fraud if that's your big worry.


Now chill out and stop worrying. I don't think that folks on here were trying to argue with you, just that lots of us have worked in banks and know that under 5ks aren't checked unless they're direct/specials or have a problem.

dunstonh

angelcake wrote:

3 years ago I worked in the clearing department of Lloydstsb! I was born in 1980 so am quite sure it wasn't then! :rolleyes:

I wish I hadn't bothered even asking now! Think I just wanted someone else to tell me it was wrong.

Nevermind

I worked at the same bank and the clearing department never got involved with the returning of cheques as a general rule. Sometimes you would get a notification where a cheque had been identified with an error. However, if the cheque was under £500, it wasnt returned and the clearing dept notification was ignored.

derrick

canny_yorkshireman wrote:

Hmm think angel has a valid point here and a point of law would be that the cheque unsigned is not legal tender and so should be returned but as the banks do not heve the resources to scrutinise evry cheque then it is accepted practice to process this which does nothing to re assure the public that the industry is fighting fraud in every corner

A cheque is not legal tender.