Bounced and Represented cheque charges

anniecave

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it will have been the landlord's bank that made the decision to re-present the cheque. Not your bank.

And as you wrote out the cheque and paid it into the other bank, then clearly you did intend to make payment by cheque.

I would have been up-front with the landlord by saying you were expecting a payment from whatever source on whatever date, and you intented to pay by faster payment after that date. I've had to do this with rent at a previous place on one occasion, and they were perfectly understanding as they understood it was a one-off.

UsetheFORCE

lolavix wrote: »

So did you write the cheque out the day the funds were in the account? Obviously not, no bank error there.

Just because a payment is 'expected', doesn't mean that it's guaranteed

As the law states.... I did not KNOWINGLY write the cheque, not expecting it to clear.

The money should of been in on the day the cheque was presented for payment...

Dep Day -1 (Treated as Day 1), Money due in Day 2, cheque presented Day 3

I haven't done anything wrong as I read the law.

Hazzanet

anniecave wrote: »

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it will have been the landlord's bank that made the decision to re-present the cheque. Not your bank.

It sounds as though the drawer's bank expected that the funds would be there shortly. In these instances, they mark the cheque "Refer to Drawer - Please Represent" (RDPR). In this case, the payee's bank will receive the cheque back and submit it again.

If the drawer's bank thinks that there is not going to be the funds there in the forseeable future, it would have been marked "Refer to Payer" (without the represent comment).

UsetheFORCE

anniecave wrote: »

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it will have been the landlord's bank that made the decision to re-present the cheque. Not your bank.

And as you wrote out the cheque and paid it into the other bank, then clearly you did intend to make payment by cheque.

I would have been up-front with the landlord by saying you were expecting a payment from whatever source on whatever date, and you intented to pay by faster payment after that date. I've had to do this with rent at a previous place on one occasion, and they were perfectly understanding as they understood it was a one-off.

I accept that the first refusal is my responsibility but MY bank instructed HIS bank to represent without my landlord actually requesting it, MY bank didn't inform me until they had refused it again!, if they had then I would of just made sure money was in my account to settle it when it was represented!!!

The bottom line is the bank should of informed me that they were not just refusing it but telling them to represent it so I can remedy the situation before it happened again!!!

Anyway **** bank, so they have lost my business as £35 a time is scandalous anyway... Natwest, Lloyds Tsb and Barclays are only £6,£7 and £8 respectively!!

thatsean

Well it's good that you've researched the fees anyway.

I honestly don't know where your anger on this comes from. You can expect all you want - but if the money isn't there it isn't there, an representation of cheques isn't new.

UsetheFORCE

thatsean wrote: »

Well it's good that you've researched the fees anyway.

I honestly don't know where your anger on this comes from. You can expect all you want - but if the money isn't there it isn't there, an representation of cheques isn't new.

If I am not aware they are going to represent it, why would I know??? They didn't inform me they requested representation until AFTER they declined it again!

They are in part cupable they it got declined again as if they had informed me in the first place that they were going to do this then I would of ensured funds were there instead of settling direct with my landlord!!!

BobQ

OP,

You seem to have asked for advice yet seem intent on challenging all you are given in a slightly antagonistic way.

The principles of cheques have been understood for many years and as has been noted this chain of events is purely due to your misunderstanding of the process.

Your cheque is a promise by you to pay whenever it is presented to your bank. If you write it and you have insufficient funds to pay your cheque is dishonoured. In some countries the consequences are more serious than in others but at the very least your bank has the right to charge you for its costs in dealing with your mistake.

Unless the receiving bank tells the presenting bank not to re-present it they can do so. If you do not want them to do this the solution is simple - make sure that have the money in the account to cover it.

dalesrider

UsetheFORCE wrote: »

As the law states.... I did not KNOWINGLY write the cheque, not expecting it to clear.

The money should of been in on the day the cheque was presented for payment...

Dep Day -1 (Treated as Day 1), Money due in Day 2, cheque presented Day 3

I haven't done anything wrong as I read the law.

But you did not know that the money was there. Only it should be....

Not quite the same thing.

You did not know for certain when you gave the landlord the cheque that the funds were in place to pay it.

Even if your bank had informed you on the 1st bounce. It would still have not have stopped the other bank for not represneting.

The only person that could have stopped that is your landlord.

UsetheFORCE

BobQ wrote: »

OP,

You seem to have asked for advice yet seem intent on challenging all you are given in a slightly antagonistic way.

The principles of cheques have been understood for many years and as has been noted this chain of events is purely due to your misunderstanding of the process.

Your cheque is a promise by you to pay whenever it is presented to your bank. If you write it and you have insufficient funds to pay your cheque is dishonoured. In some countries the consequences are more serious than in others but at the very least your bank has the right to charge you for its costs in dealing with your mistake.

Unless the receiving bank tells the presenting bank not to re-present it they can do so. If you do not want them to do this the solution is simple - make sure that have the money in the account to cover it.

This is the first cheque I have written (000001), I understand I have made a mistake but my point is that I have no advance warning of my banks intent to screw me over a second time.

They notified me AFTER the second attempt, if I had known about it sooner, I could of rectified it!!!

They certainly ain't charging me the costs, they charge £35 but most other banks charge between £5-£10.

Anyway, I am grateful for replies but a lot don't actually answer the question as to why should I be liable for an action I have no idea they are going to take!!! The first time, YES but the second time, I DON'T THINK SO!!!

Anyway, I will take the hit for now but consider following the matter up! I certainly won't be writing another cheque anytime soon or giving the a*******s at Yorkshire Bank my custom in future.

Regards

UsetheFORCE

dalesrider wrote: »

But you did not know that the money was there. Only it should be....

Not quite the same thing.

You did not know for certain when you gave the landlord the cheque that the funds were in place to pay it.

Even if your bank had informed you on the 1st bounce. It would still have not have stopped the other bank for not represneting.

The only person that could have stopped that is your landlord.

If the bank had informed me that they had requested the Drawer or their bank to represent then I could of ensured the funds were paid into my account instead of by Faster Payment to my landlord.

My landlord I don't think understood they would automatically represent it!

Anyway, thank you for the input.