I have a proceeds check from a brokerage account that is payable to the order of my wife and me, "JTWRS." The brokerage account is a joint tenancy account with right of survivorship. My wife endorsed the check and deposited it in her personal checking account, of which I was not an owner. The money is now gone. Was the depository bank correct in accepting and depositing the check without my endorsement?
If the two payee names were connected by "and" or "&" the endorsements of both payees would be required for negotiation by section 3-110(d) of the Uniform Commercial Code in most states. If the names were joined by "or" only one endorsement would be required. In most states, that UCC provision also says that when it's ambiguous whether the payees are named alternatively, the payees are to be considered named alternatively.
The legend "JTWROS" as part of the naming of multiple payees does not require that all payees endorse. Absence of any conjunction between multiple payee names constitutes ambiguity.
The question of payee ambiguity, however, may not be so clear-cut in your state. Considering that the sum involved may be substantial, contact legal counsel familiar with the workings of the UCC, particularly section 3-110(d), in the state where your bank is located.
BankingQuestions.com is a free service made possible by the generous support of our advertisers. Advertisers are not responsible for site content. Please help us keep BankingQuestions.com FREE by supporting our advertisers. When you see an ad for a product or service you may have an interest in, click through to learn more.
Accounts
Article
Q&A
Podcast
Video
Blog
Discussions
PDF
Powerpoint
If the two payee names were connected by "and" or "&" the endorsements of both 