Recently my roommate (I share an apt) bounced two checks, including the one for rent. He had plenty of available money to cover both checks, but according to his bank, they bounced for "undisclosed reasons" by the institutions each of the check payees used. When he asked them to clarify, his bank informed him he had to contact the bank(s) which refused to accept his checks. When he did this, he was told that since he did not have an account at one of these institutions, they could not give him any information as to why/where/how his check did not clear.

So, my questions are: What is his recourse in order to determine what these "undisclosed reasons" are? Which institution should be the one to do it? Can the bank(s) that refused his checks actually wipe their hands clean, and say that since he's not one of their customers, they're under no obligation to give him any information?

Any insight/help anyone has would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

I cannot conceive of a case in which your roomie's checks would have been bounced by any bank other than his own. His bank is the only one with any decision to make about whether the checks are any good.

If the other banks lost the checks before they could be sent to roomie's bank for payment, that's another story.

Something about your question leads me to believe there is more to the story here. Until we know the rest of the story, I don't think we can be of help.

Not sure I understand this. Are these checks you wrote drawn on your account, or checks you deposited. It sounds like you deposited checks that bounced back to you causing the checks you wrote for rent to bounce. Is that right?

Thanks, John, but while there may in fact be more info that could help - he has in fact bounced checks in the past (3-4 months ago) for having insufficient funds - all I can do is relay what he's told me. He swears up and down that in this instance he had more than enough available funds, and while I too find it strange that he was told they bounced for undisclosed reasons, that's all he's told me. And I do in fact believe in this instance he did have enough to cover them. I also believe that he's telling the truth when he says that they weren't denied for NSF like his previous ones were a few months back. I know it might sound fishy to you, but I thought I'd ask to see if I could help him out - assuming he's telling me the whole/true story.

One other possibility is that his bank bounced his checks because the funds he had in his account, although adequate, were not yet considered available because they were from checks he had deposited.

It's permissible for banks to keep a shorter rein on availability of funds deposited by check if the account in question has been recurringly overdrawn. Your response, Mandalay, suggests this may be what has happened here. But I am perplexed as to why his bank would not tell him that outright. Perhaps they did and roomie didn't hear the answer?

His checks are not bounced by the payees bank. They are bounced by his bank. The payees bank can refuse to take them for deposit from the payee for things like he didn't sign the check. but they give the item back to their customer they don't send them to your roommates bank.

Doesn't sound like a good story to me.

Again, let me clarify: I did note write or bounce any checks. I have limited information to go by as you can tell.

My roommate wrote two checks, drawn on his account, that bounced. According to him, his bank told him 'Yes, you had enough available funds for these to clear. Our system indicates they were refused for "undisclosed reasons".' He was then told that he had to contact the check-payee bank(s) to determine why his checks were denied. When he contacted these other institutions, they told him they couldn't give him any info b/c he's not an account holder there.

I won't disagree that I might not have all the facts, the whole story, or that 2 and 2 are not adding up to 4. But you have what I have. I didn't know, for instance, if he forgot to sign one of the checks, that this could potentially be one of those 'undisclosed reasons'.

I appreciate your help, I apologize if I've confused anyone.

There may be a communication gap between he and a person at his bank. If his bank bounced the check they know exactly why they were returned. He should ask for a supervisor to explain the reason.

The part about being told to "..contact the check-payee bank(s) to determine why his checks were denied..." doesn't ring true. The bank that he has his account with knows exactly why the checks were returned (the payee bank(s) are right in not discussing this issue). I agree that he should contact a supervisor at his own bank to get to the bottom of this.

You have my sympathies for the difficult situation that you are in. It may be time to consider cash only transactions with this roomie (before one of his checks give you a problem), this will also give him a chance to let everything in his account settle down and start clean.

It may be that a check that he deposited has bounced, he may be suspected of kiting, there may be some legal action against his account such as garnishment, or several other "unusual" events for which the bank selected the "Undisclosed Reasons" option. To more directly answer your question, I guess an unsigned check could also be one of the reasons, however, he would not have been referred to the payee bank for this.

Good luck.

Is it possible the term "bounced" is being mis-used? Perhaps the payee has decided not to accept checks as payment because they have bounced in the past. The payee probably got hit with a fee from their bank so they imposed a no check rule and returned them for that.