altered cheque

Loughton_Monkey

Olipro wrote: »

if it's clear the cheque has been altered, that would classify as criminal forgery.

Maybe, but prove who did it! Could have been the payee, the bank, or anyone else for that matter.

AnonymousForObviousReason

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Maybe, but prove who did it! Could have been the payee, the bank, or anyone else for that matter.

The bank would have no need to change it in all likelihood, what's the payee going to say "I left it in a Pub and my mate did it". This is where you then sue them in a small claims court, the burden of proof is just probably compared to beyond reasonable doubt. The hardest part will be getting someone to care but if you push they'll have to follow it up.

Mark_In_Hampshire

If a cheque is altered:

I may be out of date here as it's a long time since I worked in a shop

If the alteration is obvious, for instance, the amount in words has clearly had "ONE HUNDRED AND" inserted in front of the prior amount, then the change needs to be signed by the account holder (the one issuing the cheque) otherwise the cheque is void.

However if the date were changed in such a way that the change is only obvious to the person who wrote it, then the bank can't reasonably be expected to pick up on that, and so it will be presented and will be processed.

I agree with AFOR above - you have a case against the person you paid the cheque to.

Fiddlestick

AnonymousForObviousReason wrote: »

This is where you then sue them in a small claims court, the burden of proof is just probably compared to beyond reasonable doubt.

Civil cases are judged on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt.

bengal-stripe

Mark_In_Hampshire wrote: »

I agree with AFOR above - you have a case against the person you paid the cheque to.

I rather doubt it! No harm has been done, no advantage has been gained.

A cheque is payable the day it is presented. Post-dating is a concept that does not exist, or at least, has no legal standing. By altering the date, the payee has no advantage to gain. (If the cheque had been older than six months and the payee had altered the date, s/he would have gained, or saved themselves the trouble to ask for a new cheque.)

As someone who used to have to bank cheques, it is unbelievable how many "honest mistakes" people make accidentally-on-purpose when issuing a cheque and sending it by post: dates are wrong, signatures are missing, figures und words do not correspond - all that, in the hope the cheque gets rejected and the drawer gains a few more days.

No wonder, the cheque is on it's way out. Cheques have been abused.

Chadsman

There was a similar case discussed on (???) Moneybox a few years ago. IIRC they said a cheque is a written instruction to a bank to pay a specific amount on a specific day- if a customer wishes to specify a date before which it cannot be paid then they can do so. However many (most???) banks also now have a clause in their t&cs to the effect customers should not post date cheques and if a postdated cheque is presented to for payment the bank will have the right to pay it (or not) at their discretion.
b45ter- check the t&cs of your account. I would guess it is unlikely you would have a legal claim against the bank but if you go in to the branch and explain what happened they may waive the fees as a gesture of goodwill.

Mark_In_Hampshire

Chadsman wrote: »

There was a similar case discussed on (???) Moneybox a few years ago. IIRC they said a cheque is a written instruction to a bank to pay a specific amount on a specific day- if a customer wishes to specify a date before which it cannot be paid then they can do so. However many (most???) banks also now have a clause in their t&cs to the effect customers should not post date cheques and if a postdated cheque is presented to for payment the bank will have the right to pay it (or not) at their discretion.
b45ter- check the t&cs of your account. I would guess it is unlikely you would have a legal claim against the bank but if you go in to the branch and explain what happened they may waive the fees as a gesture of goodwill.

Believe this is absolutely correct. You might have a case against the recipient of the cheque, but not against the bank.

AnonymousForObviousReason

Fiddlestick wrote: »

Quote:Originally Posted by AnonymousForObviousReason
This is where you then sue them in a small claims court, the burden of proof is just probably compared to beyond reasonable doubt.

Civil cases are judged on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt.

Thank you for agreeing with me Fiddlestick, or were you pointing out a missing comma?


Bengal-stripe, I've tried not quoted you out of context but only to split your points into chunks.

No harm has been done, no advantage has been gained.

The harm to the OP could include: costs for the bounced direct debits, damaged credit rating and there has been some distress.

I don't see the relevance advantage to be honest but the person cashing the cheque has gained the advantage by having the money in their account before was agreed and who knows the charges they have avoided.
Maybe talking about pennies but the first computer hackers were charged with the theft of electricity used by the computers they accessed.

There may have been no intent but (monetary) damage has been caused, as such the OP would be entitled to appropriate compensation.

A cheque is payable the day it is presented. Post-dating is a concept that does not exist, or at least, has no legal standing.

Yes banks tend to cash cheques when presented. However, it does have a legal standing because it was (the offer) part of the contract, the cheque was not to be presented before the particular date.

No wonder, the cheque is on it's way out. Cheques have been abused.

Agree

They cost banks far to much with time and hassle - but lots of people do rely on them, especially small businesses where bills are paid in two parts and as receiving payments. Also I have to use them to open up internet bank accounts as first payment - wonder what will be used instead?

oldwiring

From HSBC T&C

21.4 When writing a cheque:
• you must take all reasonable precautions to
prevent anyone else altering it or making a
forgery. This includes (but is not limited to) using
black ink which cannot be erased, never leaving
a gap between words or figures and never signing
a cheque before you use it;
• which you then post, clearly write the name of
the person you are paying the cheque to and also
put extra information about them on the front
of the cheque. For example, Inland Revenue,
account J Jones or AAA Bank, account J Jones;
• you must not write a future date on it as it may
not prevent the payee from paying it into their
bank before that date.

Other banks are very likely to be the same.

If you use on line banking, why not use it? Most probably allow you to choose the date you want money to be transferred out.

bengal-stripe

AnonymousForObviousReason wrote: »

Yes banks tend to cash cheques when presented. However, it does have a legal standing because it was (the offer) part of the contract, the cheque was not to be presented before the particular date.

A cheque does not provide the space to determine at what date you want the money be paid. It only provides the space for the date the cheque was written, which has to be today’s date. To provide any other but today’s date, is already a falsification. (I cannot sign anything a week in advance, for all I know, I might be dead in a week’s time.)

Old-fashioned “Bills of Exchange” had that space to determine the date of payment. You issued a series of documents (with today’s date) one bill was payable on January 1st, February1st, March 1st etc. (on which your bank would lend you money until the day they became due).

The OP might have had (or might not have had) an informal agreement that the cheque was not to be presented before a particular date. The written date doe not prove that agreement. Was the money due on the date the cheque was written, or wasn't it?

In that previous job (some twenty odd years ago) when I prepared cheques for banking (for a utility company), probably one in twenty cheques was deficient in one way or another: of course, all “honest mistakes”, signatures missing, figures and words did not match, but wrong date was probably the most popular one. Many people decided to post-date their cheques a month in advance. On arrival, every cheque got stamped with a big “Received, date”. Despite the not infrequent discrepancies in the dates, we did bank the cheques regardless, as we had not agreed for the client to pay a month later (if they bounced, they bounced). The OP will have a hard time to prove, that an agreement was in place.

If the debt is not due until a certain date, do not issue a cheque beforehand.