WHY IS BANK OF AMERICA SAYING FOR LOST CHECK WILL TAKE 3 MONTHS BEFORE THEY WILL RE ISSUE ANOTHER CASHIERS CHECK. WHY? THEY HAVE OUR MONEY, WHY NOT GET A CHECK RIGHT WAY IF THE CHECK HAS NOT CLEARED.

A properly issued cashier's check is an obligation of the bank- if it tries to post, they will have to pay it. The Unform Commercial Code outlines instances in which a bank may refuse to pay a cashier's check, because of an enforceable claim (such as a lost check). But it goes on to say that the claim is not enforceable until 90 days after the issue date of the check.

So because of the way the law reads, if the bank reissues the check before the 90 day period, and both checks clear, the bank will have to pay them both, effectively taking a loss because they only received payment for one purchase. But by waiting until 90 days have passed, the bank is able to return the original (lost) check if presented, based on your claim.

I am a small business owner and we recently accepted a fraudulent cashiers check. Our bank accepted the check and ran it through their fed clearing department. Then they sent it to the bank the check was supposedly drawn off of and it was returned stamped NOI. The bank the check was drawn off of handled the check on the first and our bank did not return it until the 3rd. Can you explain to me the course of action I could take? Thank you.

Laura,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you are dealing with a counterfeit item. If that is the case, your only real recourse at this point is to go after the scammer that gave you the check in the first place. The drawee bank is not obligated to pay the item, because it was never issued by them in the first place, and from the dates you posted, it appears that they returned the check to you in a timely fashion.

This really is not my area of expertise so I probably shouldn't respond, but...we had an FBI agent come to the bank this morning and talk about this exact scenario. (Unfortunately it is happening all the time and getting worse!) From what he said, the bank that accepted the cashier's check would be liable. I could have misunderstood, but that's what I thought he said. Have you reported this to the police? That would be the first place to start. I'm sure they have a fraud division that could help you.

Thank you so much for your input! I just could not imagine being responsible for the check after it was cleared through a Federal clearing house! We already have a lawyer working on this with the district attourney. Thank you again!

Even if the bank cleared the check through a Federal clearing house? They didn't even put a hold on the check. It just so happened that our statement came out and it showed that the check was deposited in full without hold on the day it was presented to the bank. I don't understand. I am not trained to catch or detect fraud. Aren't they?

I'm not sure I understand. If the check was an obvious forgery then they are responsible? Forgive me please I know nothing about banking laws or fraudulent checks.

Forgiveness isn't necessary. We get these questions a lot.

Obvious counterfeit or not, the bank that accepts a check for deposit is acting as a collecting agent for its customer. The UCC will still place liability on the depositing customer, whose recourse is to the person who delivered the odious item to the depositor.

That said, if the bank or customer suspect an item as counterfeit, calls can be attempted (with varying success) to verify the check's authenticity. But the bank named on the check is not obliged to respond with information. In such a case, the customer could request, or the bank could insist upon, sending the check for collection rather than putting it on deposit. In that way, no one receives credit for the check unless it is paid as good funds.

In today's environment, cashier's checks received from anyone other than a trusted party should be considered suspect. Unfortunately, that's where we are today.