Once a stop payment is satisfied (item is returned stop payment) is the stop payment order complete. If by chance another item comes in, could I rely on the original stop payment order for six months or would I need to get a new stop payment order for the second item. I am especially concerned about ACH or electronic items.

Once the stop payment is acted upon, it is complete, and now void. If the issuer wants to stop it again next time, another stop payment order must be issued. In the ACH arena, if it is a recurring debit that keeps trying to post, and you have revoked authorization according to the specifications of the company that is sending the debit (most require it in writing), then you can have the bank send the ACH back as 'authorization revoked' and you must sign a 'written statement under penalty of perjury' every time the ACH appears again

If you have issued a check and now wis to stop payment and are really concerned that the payee will try to slip a fast one on you (especially if the check is payment for something that is now in dispute), then you will have to keep renewing that stop payment even after the check has been returned as "Payment Stopped."

I have seen a check that was a year old that had "Payment Stopped" stamped on it, and the check still got paid.

If the check is really big, you might consider closing out your account and opening a new one.

IMHO, Stop Payments are a very poor method of trying to force a dispute resolution.

If you are concerned about a specific company trying to send through an ACH on your account, you should ask your bank if they can stop all incoming ACH debits for a specific company (called the ACH originator). Some banks have that ability. Remember, this would stop ALL ACHs from that specific ACH originator, so don't choose this option if you have any ACH items coming in from the company that you want to the bank to post to your account.

Let's clarify a few things in this Thread.

For a paper check, once a stop payment is issued on the check, the stop remains legally valid for six months (most states) even if the check is bounced for stop payment earlier. The stop should not be lifted by the bank just because the check was caught the first time.

If John Jones stops payment on a $1000 check to Sam Smith and the drawee bank catches the check, stamps it "stop payment," punches holes in the account number, etc., and returns the check, Sam Smith can still redeposit the check at his bank (if it lets him) after having repaired the MICR line with information he copied (an image, perhaps) before the check was presented the first time. Since checks are handled on an exception basis, if the repaired item is presented a second time for payment, it will be paid if the stop was released by the drawee bank. John Jones would have a legal case against his bank for paying over the stop.

With ACH items, however, the stop order is only effective against a specific electronic item. If the originator sends another item, the second item is not stopped.

I'm confused....Let's say the $1000 check John Jones wrote has shown up in Sam Smith's account, Sam Smith then spends the $1000. In the meantime, John Jones puts a stop payment on the check before it is deducted from his account. What happens? Will Sam Smith's bank try to get the $1000 back, leaving Sam Smith in the negative?

Yes. Sam will be in the negative. If Sam's bank cannot collect from Sam because he's spent the money and isn't likely to have more, Sam's bank can go after John Jones directly because Sam's bank is a holder in due course. They can rightfully demand that Jones make good on the check, even though he's stopped payment on it.

What happens if John Jones decides to close his account after he stops the check? Does Sam's bank still go after him?

If Sam's bank goes after Jones, they will do so outside the banking system. They'll send him a letter demanding payment for the amount of the check as a holder in due course. It won't matter that Jones's account is closed. And remember, they will only go after Jones if they can't charge the check back to Smith's account.

If Smith's account does have enough money and the check gets charged back to Smith, Smith may or may not still have money due from Jones. We don't know what caused Jones to write the check in the first place. But if he was paying Jones for goods or services, Jones may be entitled to the money, regardless of the fact that the check was stopped.