New Check Law

What you're talking about is done by several stores now. The device that
the check is run thru does not scan the whole check, but only the numbers
along the bottom of the check. What you're basically authorizing is an
electronic funds transfer from your bank to the store just as if you used
an
electronic bank card. You're not required to allow this, you can ask the
store to accept the written check instead of going the transfer route.


And then they scan it after you've left and it has the same effect.. you
just don't get your check handed back to you.. but it does require them to
process it through the banking system.. but they put a "pending withdrawal"
on your account so they get first dibs on your money..

BT

What you're talking about is done by several stores now. The device that
the check is run thru does not scan the whole check, but only the numbers
along the bottom of the check. What you're basically authorizing is an
electronic funds transfer from your bank to the store just as if you used
an
electronic bank card. You're not required to allow this, you can ask the
store to accept the written check instead of going the transfer route.


And then they scan it after you've left and it has the same effect.. you
just don't get your check handed back to you.. but it does require them to
process it through the banking system.. but they put a "pending withdrawal"
on your account so they get first dibs on your money..

BT

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:51:29 -0500, "Jim Fisher"
wrote:


"Greg Butler" wrote in message
t...
Many banks send a copy of the cancelled check to you instead of the
original, and keep the originals in the vault, but for a couple more weeks
they still have to legally send the originals between banks.


Y'all ain't getting it.

This is a new process where you write a check, the cashier scans it in
seconds, then gives you back your original check.

2 or 3 years ago, my wife and I had this done at 1 place, 1 time.
Perhaps it was a test, the situation has never repeated. This is
Greenville SC. We use a credit union, so it was not a bank test
restricted to the store and us using the same bank.

I've wondered about it since, and wish I could remember where it was.

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:51:29 -0500, "Jim Fisher"
wrote:


"Greg Butler" wrote in message
t...
Many banks send a copy of the cancelled check to you instead of the
original, and keep the originals in the vault, but for a couple more weeks
they still have to legally send the originals between banks.


Y'all ain't getting it.

This is a new process where you write a check, the cashier scans it in
seconds, then gives you back your original check.

2 or 3 years ago, my wife and I had this done at 1 place, 1 time.
Perhaps it was a test, the situation has never repeated. This is
Greenville SC. We use a credit union, so it was not a bank test
restricted to the store and us using the same bank.

I've wondered about it since, and wish I could remember where it was.

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 13:26:59 -0500, "Greg Butler"
wrote:

I have been hearing about this new law that allows banks to transmit check
electronically instead of having to actually deliver the checks.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...bou ncefaster
Is this going to destroy the check-delivering business that some pilots are
employed by? Looks like to me it will. Just curious about your thoughts.

Yes, it will destroy the check-delivery business. I wonder what
percentage of planes are used for the check delivery, and what effect
that would have on twin prices.... A lot of 310s just lost their
jobs.

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 13:26:59 -0500, "Greg Butler"
wrote:

I have been hearing about this new law that allows banks to transmit check
electronically instead of having to actually deliver the checks.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...bou ncefaster
Is this going to destroy the check-delivering business that some pilots are
employed by? Looks like to me it will. Just curious about your thoughts.

Yes, it will destroy the check-delivery business. I wonder what
percentage of planes are used for the check delivery, and what effect
that would have on twin prices.... A lot of 310s just lost their
jobs.

John E. Carty wrote:

Yep, the days of being able to 'float' a check are almost gone. This new
process debits your account immediately and will prevent future losses to
businesses from bad checks :-)

On the other hand any checks YOU received have immediate funds availability
as well. The gov't has been tightening up the time it takes to clear checks
over the past couple of decades.

I still find having at least the substitute paper reassuring to me (and
my horrendous filing system). Of course, I do find it handy to be able
to call up images of my checks that haven't been mailed back to me on
my bank's web site.

Ron Natalie wrote:

I still find having at least the substitute paper reassuring to me (and
my horrendous filing system). Of course, I do find it handy to be able
to call up images of my checks that haven't been mailed back to me on
my bank's web site.

I need a change. I don't get *either* with my Credit Union account. If I need a copy
of the actual check, they charge me $5 and have to mail or FAX it to me. (Of course,
I've only needed that once in the many years I've had the account.)

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:

Ron Natalie wrote:

I still find having at least the substitute paper reassuring to me (and
my horrendous filing system). Of course, I do find it handy to be able
to call up images of my checks that haven't been mailed back to me on
my bank's web site.


I need a change. I don't get *either* with my Credit Union account. If I need a copy
of the actual check, they charge me $5 and have to mail or FAX it to me. (Of course,
I've only needed that once in the many years I've had the account.)

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.
It used to be that you wanted the actual canceled check back with the
signature on the back so you could use it as proof that the recipient
cashed the check. A photograph of the check wouldn't serve because the
signature must actually cause physical changes to the paper for
authenticity. BTW, that's why I never "sign" into the automated
checkout machines -- once you permit a digitized version of your
signature to exist, you can never refute you signature.

"William W. Plummer" wrote in message
news:11ebd.234388$MQ5.433@attbi_s52...
[...] once you permit a digitized version of your signature to exist, you
can never refute you signature.

Of course you can. If anything, the presence of digital signatures makes it
*easier* to refute your signature, not harder.

Personally, I find it amazing that a signature has remained such a
well-respected standard of authentication for so long. But the requirement
for witnesses (notary or otherwise) for certain kinds of signatures is proof
enough that the law understands that signatures are not a "gold standard".

Ultimately, any disagreement will come down to whether it's believable that
you did or not not sign a particular document that you claim to or claim not
to have signed. The presence of a signature does not in and of itself
constitute proof, nor does the existence of a digitized version of your
signature affect that.

It amazes me that an MIT graduate would claim that it does.

Pete