Overseas cheques and signing the back

Forums › Off topic › Overseas cheques and signing the back

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#217950 19-Jul-2017 17:01

I have been deposting a monthly overseas cheque (in US dollars) into my NZ bank account for the last 5 years or so. I do this via the banks envelope deposit box, and it ends up in my account a few days later. This month I made a deposit, but noticed it didn't go into my account. The next week I contact them to ask them why it didn't go in. They told me that I didn't sign the back of the cheque to endorse it, so they didn't deposit it. They said and I would need to make a trip back to the branch to sign the back. However I have never signed the back before on previous ones and they have gone though fine. Nor did the deposit bag I filled in with my name and account details, say that I must do this. The back of the cheque also doesn't say that I must sign the back of the cheque, although there is a space that could be used to sign it. Also the banks terms and conditions don't say that I must sign cheques that I deposit. I also beleive that endorsing a check isn't required, if the person depositing it has an account with the bank that it is being deposited to.

Is this normal for a cheque deposit?

Taubin

592 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 243

ID Verified

Subscriber

#1825394 19-Jul-2017 17:06

It could be an issue with the bank in the US that issued the check requesting they be signed. In the US all checks need to be signed on the back by the person that the check is made out to. I don't have experience with depositing checks here, just in the US, so it's just a guess as to how this happened.

ZL2TOY/ZL1DMP

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1825398 19-Jul-2017 17:10

Taubin:

It could be an issue with the bank in the US that issued the check requesting they be signed. In the US all checks need to be signed on the back by the person that the check is made out to. I don't have experience with depositing checks here, just in the US, so it's just a guess as to how this happened.

Thanks for your reply. I have checked the actual cheque itself, and it doesn't say it has to be signed by me in order to deposit it. Also I have deposited about 50 of these same identical cheques (from the same company) over the last 5 years, and never signed any of those before, and also used teh same NZ bank to deposit them to. I am just wondering if the bank is using it as an excuse for not depositing it when they should have.

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#1825426 19-Jul-2017 19:06

mattwnz:

Taubin:

It could be an issue with the bank in the US that issued the check requesting they be signed. In the US all checks need to be signed on the back by the person that the check is made out to. I don't have experience with depositing checks here, just in the US, so it's just a guess as to how this happened.

Thanks for your reply. I have checked the actual cheque itself, and it doesn't say it has to be signed by me in order to deposit it. Also I have deposited about 50 of these same identical cheques (from the same company) over the last 5 years, and never signed any of those before, and also used teh same NZ bank to deposit them to. I am just wondering if the bank is using it as an excuse for not depositing it when they should have.

Why on earth would they do that? Money in your account means money for them so not following your logic. Seems a small deal TBH, things change, policies and rules are amended all the time and it may not be the banks fault. I appreciate the inconvenience of going back in, but sign this one and make sure you sign the rest from now on. The 0.3 seconds it takes isn't worth ruminating over.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

timmmay

20858 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5350

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1825427 19-Jul-2017 19:07

I always had to do this with US cheques deposited in NZ.

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1825476 19-Jul-2017 20:18

scuwp:

mattwnz:

Taubin:

It could be an issue with the bank in the US that issued the check requesting they be signed. In the US all checks need to be signed on the back by the person that the check is made out to. I don't have experience with depositing checks here, just in the US, so it's just a guess as to how this happened.

Thanks for your reply. I have checked the actual cheque itself, and it doesn't say it has to be signed by me in order to deposit it. Also I have deposited about 50 of these same identical cheques (from the same company) over the last 5 years, and never signed any of those before, and also used teh same NZ bank to deposit them to. I am just wondering if the bank is using it as an excuse for not depositing it when they should have.

Why on earth would they do that? Money in your account means money for them so not following your logic. Seems a small deal TBH, things change, policies and rules are amended all the time and it may not be the banks fault. I appreciate the inconvenience of going back in, but sign this one and make sure you sign the rest from now on. The 0.3 seconds it takes isn't worth ruminating over.

It actually means a special trip back to the bank, and also means that it is going to delay me accessing the money by a week on top of the month stand down . So probably a good 30 minutes of extra time wasted + petrol, plus have to go during the work day, as banks are only open limited hours up til about 4:30pm. The other thing is that the the area on the back of the cheque that has the X besides it, which could potentially be for a signature, has VOID written across it 3 times in big letters. So either it doesn't want me to sign it, or I potentially could void the cheque if was I was to sign it. It also says in teh box on the back that the area is 'reserved for financial institutions only'. So I don't think I should sign it anyway.

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1825481 19-Jul-2017 20:31

timmmay:

I always had to do this with US cheques deposited in NZ.

That is interesting. Did the back of the cheque say you had to sign it, or did the bank refuse to accept it without this? I have never done it for the last 5 years, but I put them in one of those deposit bags with my details and signature anyway, I would have thought that that would have been enough. Maybe this banks terms have changed, but they haven't updated their terms on their website with the changes.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

timmmay

20858 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5350

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1825500 19-Jul-2017 20:50

The cheque said I had to sign it on the back.

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1825508 19-Jul-2017 21:01

timmmay:

The cheque said I had to sign it on the back.

Thanks for that. I guess that is where the difference is with mine, as mine doesn't say that. Certainly if it had, I would have happily done that.

Kiwifruta

1425 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 336

ID Verified

#1825540 19-Jul-2017 21:53

My guess the signature is required as part of anti-money laundering policies or laws.

By the way US cheques can be dishonoured up to 7 years later.

I'm surprised banks still use cheques.

Can they pay you another way?

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1825570 19-Jul-2017 23:04

Kiwifruta: My guess the signature is required as part of anti-money laundering policies or laws.

By the way US cheques can be dishonoured up to 7 years later.

I'm surprised banks still use cheques.

Can they pay you another way?

Banks seem to use the anti laundering policy for many things these days, but this bank hasn't used that this time. I suspect the bank has made an error and mis interpreted what the back of the cheque actually says. Apparently they subcontract out their deposit drop off service to a another company that isn't a bank, so cusomters can't contact the third party directly.

Cheques are the only way they will make payment, I did check this previously. It is a very large US company so there is little risk of the cheque being dishonoured for the bank. The back of the cheque also has a special 3D security pattern on it which it states can't be written on. So potentially there is a far bigger risk of the cheque being dishonoured if I did sign it.

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#1825614 20-Jul-2017 08:02

mattwnz:

scuwp:

mattwnz:

Taubin:

It could be an issue with the bank in the US that issued the check requesting they be signed. In the US all checks need to be signed on the back by the person that the check is made out to. I don't have experience with depositing checks here, just in the US, so it's just a guess as to how this happened.

Thanks for your reply. I have checked the actual cheque itself, and it doesn't say it has to be signed by me in order to deposit it. Also I have deposited about 50 of these same identical cheques (from the same company) over the last 5 years, and never signed any of those before, and also used teh same NZ bank to deposit them to. I am just wondering if the bank is using it as an excuse for not depositing it when they should have.

Why on earth would they do that? Money in your account means money for them so not following your logic. Seems a small deal TBH, things change, policies and rules are amended all the time and it may not be the banks fault. I appreciate the inconvenience of going back in, but sign this one and make sure you sign the rest from now on. The 0.3 seconds it takes isn't worth ruminating over.

It actually means a special trip back to the bank, and also means that it is going to delay me accessing the money by a week on top of the month stand down . So probably a good 30 minutes of extra time wasted + petrol, plus have to go during the work day, as banks are only open limited hours up til about 4:30pm. The other thing is that the the area on the back of the cheque that has the X besides it, which could potentially be for a signature, has VOID written across it 3 times in big letters. So either it doesn't want me to sign it, or I potentially could void the cheque if was I was to sign it. It also says in teh box on the back that the area is 'reserved for financial institutions only'. So I don't think I should sign it anyway.

Yeah appreciate this time its a PITA, but inconsequential for future deposits. We also get occasional cheques from overseas, and as far back as I can remember we have always had to endorse the back.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#1825636 20-Jul-2017 08:37

Ive also had to get an overseas cheque signed on the back, and I had to go back to the office to get the director (sole signatory) to sign it, wouldn't accept me as the depositor.

Banks love their rules, some exist for good reason, others exist purely for the sake of a rule, there is no logic or common sense to them. Still, most bankers couldn't lend their way out of a paper bag without a checkbox, so really shouldn't be surprised.

Adopt the basic rule, bankers are idiots, then you won't be surprised by their requirements.....

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19062 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16302

Lifetime subscriber

#1825682 20-Jul-2017 09:39

Taubin:

It could be an issue with the bank in the US that issued the check requesting they be signed. In the US all checks need to be signed on the back by the person that the check is made out to. I don't have experience with depositing checks here, just in the US, so it's just a guess as to how this happened.

This. In the US, cheques always have to be endorsed. If you just sign it, it becomes money that anyone can use. If you write 'for deposit only', it doesn't. If you write 'pay to the order of', it can only be cashed by the assignee. Maybe after five years the bank got called up on it.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos