I deposited 2 checks for the same amount of $13,000 from the same bank and account. All banks are in the same state and town.
First check made out to a bank that was later bought/merged by another bank, dated 9/19/07 and cleared on 10/10/07 as noted on back of check.
Second check made out to the new bank that bought/merged with
my original bank, dated 10/2/07 and cleared on 10/4/07
Bank mails me a letter on 3/17/08 stating $13,000 was returned unpaid (no other info) and I need to take care of this before they will forward the item to me and I do. 4/23/08 I receive the check and take it to the bank it was drawn on and find out it was a good check and the bank sends a letter stating this. My bank returns the $ and all is well. Until 9/22/08 and my bank takes the $ out again and thru more discussions they return the $ on 9/30/08. They again take out the $13,000.00 or I should say take out $2000.00 and overdraw my account for the rest as I no longer keep the large amounts of $ with them for the reasons above on 10/31/08. I finally get a letter on 12/5/08 stating it was not the check they orinally had Me checking on but the other $13,000.00 check written on 9/19/07 and cleared on 10/10/07. I Never endorsed either of the checks which were made out to the banks. ( The banks told me to get the checks made out to them because if they were made out to me and I endorsed the back it was possible for someone else to cash or deposit it. All deposits are directly mailed to the bank.)
Why do I have to do all this work again to find this company who is not helping now and thinks I am an idiot for not keeping better track of my money.(They do not believe the story, hope you do)
Am I liable for this money?

Why don't they use some TARP money to fix it.

Does anyone have any help??????

Anybody have a similar experience or any help?
I have been told now, thru much begging and pleading, that both checks were good. My bank has cut of contact with me and has a collection agency after me. My credit report is spotless but they keep threatening I will be reported. I know I should hire a lawyer but who wants to spend the money and the time.
FEELING LIKE DAVID AND GOLIATH. ANYBODY HAVE A STONE AND A SLINGSHOT?

for reference

I just had a similar problem, 5 months went by.
The bank does not care.
Do Bonnie & Clyde now work for the bank? Maybe Ken Lewis is a
decendent of one of them.
Seriously, does anybody now how long a bank can hold you "hostage" on a deposited check?

Wow, no replies yet? Now I know why this site is called "Bank Questions" instead of "Banking Answers." LOL

Where is everyone?

A check deposited into a savings account is up to the bank. In a checking account there is a schedule the bank has to follow (known as Reg CC) based on where they are, where the bank is the check is drawn on, and the amount. The bank advises you when the hold will release. That doesn't mean the check is good or that it cleared the other bank, it just means a calendar date has been reached that the Fed said was what it should take to clear, and still be reasonable for the customer.

I understand the clearing process.
What I do not get and it seems like the others here are;
1 what does it matter what date reg CC says because the banks come back at anytime and take the money.
2 There are 2 cases here both over a year. There must be a
cetain time frame for this type of thing?
I am a small business but have large customers and checks to deposit. When can I start "Breathing" after a check is deposited?
If I lost $13,000.00 like that first guy in this topic I would be crushed. How has that guy made out?

If the check is drawn on a U.S. bank and deposited in a U.S. bank, the general rule is that the paying bank (the one the check is drawn on) has to return the check on the business day after it receives it. That is supposed to address things like overdrafts, unauthorized signatures, stop payments, etc. In some cases involving check fraud, checks can be returned somewhat later if both banks are parties to an agreement to that effect.

A depository bank that gets a check back for forgery, overdraft, stop payment, insufficient funds more than a reasonable time after the date of deposit should examine the dates the check was processed and challenge what it believes to be a late return. The challenge can be countered by documenting that the return was timely.

The system is not perfect. If a check is lost or misrouted on the way to or from the paying bank, the delay doesn't make either bank liable for the check, and if it gets received late by the depositary bank, the depositing customer remains liable.

Another wrinkle: If the return of the check is timely and the depositary bank receives it or a notice that it's coming back, the depositary bank has an obligation under both the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and Federal Reserve Regulation CC to notify its depositing customer of the return of the check, by midnight of the business day after receipt of the charged-back check or a notice that it's coming back. If it fails to provide that notice (or return the check, which serves as the notice) within the midnight deadline, the bank is responsible for any losses caused by the delay (UCC section 4-214).

So the questions are --

• When did the check reach the paying bank?
• Did the paying bank make a timely return of the check?
• When did the depositary bank receive notice that the check was being returned?
• When did the depositary bank actually receive the returned check?
• How long did it take the depositary bank to notify its customer or charge back and return the check?

For whatever it's worth, making the check payable to the depositary bank rather than to the depositor (followed by an endorsement), is misguided. I wonder whether the fact that there was no mention of the depositor's name on either the front or back of the check may have delayed the depositary bank's handling of the check. If that is the case, the depositary bank should eat the entire loss in this case.