Cheque paid into wrongly named account

johnmoney05

maybe he is N Leicester??

Cara79

Well the OP's name is Dave. And he said he wrote a cheque in the name of N Leicester.

Unless he wrote a cheque to himself from one account to another (and his name is not really Dave). I guess that could explain it.

Dave2112 - can you shed some more light pls?

x

amandathepanda

I'm confused, something doesn't quite add up here. As a Bank cashier myself,if a cheque was made out to N Lester and was for the account N Leicester we would accept it and presume it was just a spelling error. There can't be many people with the name of N Leicester/Lester.
We wouldn't accept a cheque which was made out to T lester/Leicester or any other surname, but as the surname sounds exactly the same we would show a bit of common sense and accept it. We get cheques paid in all the time with spelling mistakes, and if we sent customers away and refused to accept them they wouldn't be happy.

MarkyMarkD

I agree 100% with amanda.

If you give a cheque to someone, and accidentally mis-spell their name, it is none of your business if they bank it into an account with a differently spelled name, and nor has the bank/BS done anything wrong in clearing it.

The only issue arises if the cheque was stolen and paid into the wrong account, in which case there's a theft issue but not necessarily a banking one.

Mikeyorks

Dave2112 wrote:

But I think it should reversed cos the names are not the same and the cheque is "A/C payee" - this will also get my money back quicker.

further searching has found something in the cheques act 1992 which might help though.

The Cheques Act of 1992 was a hasty piece of legislation designed specifically to mitigate fraud cases whereby stolen cheques were being 'third partied' into convenient current accounts.

It will not assist you with a mis-spelt payee (deliberate or otherwise). Just as, in the same way, it would do nothing to get you money back from HMRC if you made a cheque out to their old name of 'Customs & Excise' - and expected them not to successfully Bank it.

johnmoney05

amandathepanda wrote:

I'm confused, something doesn't quite add up here. As a Bank cashier myself,if a cheque was made out to N Lester and was for the account N Leicester we would accept it and presume it was just a spelling error. There can't be many people with the name of N Leicester/Lester.
We wouldn't accept a cheque which was made out to T lester/Leicester or any other surname, but as the surname sounds exactly the same we would show a bit of common sense and accept it. We get cheques paid in all the time with spelling mistakes, and if we sent customers away and refused to accept them they wouldn't be happy.

Glad to hear that. Totally agree. I will not be happy if my cheque got rejected just because the spelling mistake. Even more uphappy, if I got charged for the bounce back cheque.

M_Thomson

MarkyMarkD wrote:

I agree 100% with amanda.

If you give a cheque to someone, and accidentally mis-spell their name, it is none of your business if they bank it into an account with a differently spelled name, and nor has the bank/BS done anything wrong in clearing it.

The only issue arises if the cheque was stolen and paid into the wrong account, in which case there's a theft issue but not necessarily a banking one.

Normally I agree with everything you say but on this I have to disagree, any banking institution that accepts cheques is supposed to pay them into an account that matches what is on the cheque. They are breaking the law if they don't.

Paul_Herring

M_Thomson wrote:

They are breaking the law if they don't.

Citation please? (Incidentally I'm also intregued by the fact that the cheque writer, and not the cheque benificiary appears to be the one complaining here.)

virgin_moneysaver

M_Thomson wrote:

Normally I agree with everything you say but on this I have to disagree, any banking institution that accepts cheques is supposed to pay them into an account that matches what is on the cheque. They are breaking the law if they don't.

so you would really expect us not to apply a bit of common when presented cqs where the cq writer has got the name spelt slightly differently when there are a couple of ways of spelling the same name - Davies & Davis is a common one, & in your case Thomson & Thompson

johnmoney05

virgin_moneysaver wrote:

so you would really expect us not to apply a bit of common when presented cqs where the cq writer has got the name spelt slightly differently when there are a couple of ways of spelling the same name - Davies & Davis is a common one, & in your case Thomson & Thompson

Yes. And sometimes it is VERY difficult to read the handwriting...