Complaint advice? Bank accepted cheques with different payee name

System

18cc wrote: »

I think it is well known that when you pay a cheque in the payee name is often not checked they have been stories about people making cheques payable to Mickey Mouse and the bank accepting them that would not be true if you paid in over the counter of course but if you paid in at a machine you might want to Google it as I'm sure there are stories out there about the bank just not checking pay name it would be impractical because of the large number of checks you would probably have a claim against the bank for not doing so

The virtually zero chance of this with a 30k cheque.

Cheques under £500 maybe until a few years ago, I think 1k is the usual limit now.

Sea_Shell

Was it actually written "John Smith", or J Smith or Mr J Smith. Was she also a J Smith???

C_A_Penny

Very clearly "John Smith" - Christian name and surname, no initials or title. It could not have been confused with Wife2's name.


Update: I have spoken to the branch where the cheques were deposited. I thought it was worth another call now that I have the copies. The person I spoke to confirmed again that the cheques would not have been accepted without the payee's name being on the account. I have emailed the copies so she is now investigating and hopes to get back to me tomorrow.

Not_Radio2

Can you upload a copies of the cheques here - blanking out sort code and account no, so more informed suggestions may be made to you on how these may have been accepted into the 3rd party's account.

C_A_Penny

No, I will not upload copies of the cheques, too much information.

I have heard back from the receiving bank but they are unable to confirm/deny anything due to Data Protection. I had asked whether they could confirm whether my father's name was on the account at the time the cheques were deposited. I then asked about procedures and she confirmed that the payee name would be checked if paid over the counter. She suggested I ask Wife2 again, or ask her to ask them(!).

Reading between the lines, it seems unlikely that there have been two signifcant bank errors - in which case, this possibly wraps up my original question about what might happen if I were to raise a complaint against the bank. I shall have to consider my options very carefully; £30k would be very difficult to ignore, it might come down to a moral question.

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to consider this.

Terry_Towelling

Sorry but my brain is letting me down a bit here - can you help me to understand?

The cheques in question were not drawn on any of your father's accounts but on someone else's account because they were being paid to him as part of an inheritance. There were also multiple cheques used to pay the entire inheritance. Have I got that right?

I'm therefore guessing that you had information advising the individual cheque amounts/cheque numbers payable to John Smith and that you discovered only some of them were credited to his accounts. Through those credits you were able to identify the drawing bank and ask them about the missing cheques. They then provided copies of all the cashed cheques and details of the receiving bank accounts. Is that right?

What was it that told you that Wife2 was the holder of the account where the missing cheques had been deposited? Can such information be gleaned from the cashed cheques? If it can, wouldn't that be confirmation that the account was in her sole name? If it can't did she tell you this herself when you raised the issue of the missing inheritance payments? If the latter, she might have been trying to deflect you from staking any claim to any of the cash in the account unaware that the bank has already confirmed it would not have accepted cheques in a name not on the account.

As for the cheques drawn on your father's account by Wife2, did this happen after she became a joint holder of that account with your father? If so, why didn't she just bank all of the inheritance cheques there and then draw on them in this manner? The only reason that springs to my mind is that the savings account in her name only was in fact in joint names.

My gut feeling here is that she is not telling you the truth about the names on her savings account - for whatever reason.

jonesMUFCforever

I can see where this is going a claim against the bank rather than wife2 - does the OP think that the bank will cough up the money?
Even if they slipped up I can see them saying sorry and offering a compensation figure (hundreds?) then say take it up with wife2.

C_A_Penny

Hi Terry Towelling - you're close...
A private company was set up by some of the beneficiaries of the family inheritance and the cheques are dividend payments reflecting two very successful and lucrative years (never to be repeated, usually nil/very low). I have my father's papers and chanced upon the two covering letters but couldn't find the deposits in my father's bank account (checking they had been declared for tax and also whether he had any other accounts). I asked Wife2 and she told me they had been paid into "her" savings account. My cousin, the company secretary, confirmed that the cheques were in my father's name only. By this time, I suspected either bank error, that the cheques had been altered or the account was really a joint account. I obtained copies of the cheques (unchanged) and I asked Wife2 again - she said she couldn't remember and must have simply paid them in without the payee name being questioned. I have tried to explain that I am legally obliged to declare the balance of any joint accounts for inheritance tax purposes. I was then informed by Wife2's solicitor that the account has only ever been in Wife2's sole name (obviously a quick look at the appropriate statements/pass book would also have proved this at less expense!).

There's much more to this story (which would help explain why I can't simply let it go) but I am at an impasse - the bank denies the cheques would have been accepted unless it was a joint account and the recipient denies it was a joint account.

xylophone

the bank denies the cheques would have been accepted unless it was a joint account and the recipient denies it was a joint account.

I was then informed by Wife2's solicitor that the account has only ever been in Wife2's sole name (obviously a quick look at the appropriate statements/pass book would also have proved this at less expense!).

If you have proof that the account in question was a sole account, then you raise a formal complaint and await events?

Terry_Towelling

Is it possible that another account was in existence (about which we know nothing) and that this was a joint one? Wife2 paid them in there and then transferred the money across to her sole savings account. Is this something that is evident from copies of the cashed cheques, or is it something that needs to be asked directly and get a solicitor's response?

Wife2 could be playing games - the answer to the question about the savings account being sole or joint has been answered correctly (we believe) but so far we only have Wife2's word for it that she paid the cheques into that account. Perhaps we need a sworn affidavit that the cheques were paid in there directly (rather than indirectly) - in which case it has to be bank error or the sworn affidavit would be a lie.