I just went through a drive-thru (Wells Fargo) ATM and used the “no envelope” feature to deposit a check (written against a commercial/company bank account), but I didn’t have a pen on me to endorse the back. There was no cash withdrawn, just a straight deposit into my personal checking account.
Is it absolutely necessary to endorse the back of a check when depositing it? What’s likely to happen to the processing of that deposit? Will they just let it go, or should I expect them to try to call me in to come sign it?
In the old days, when a check was an instrument that had to stand on its own and carry its own history, yes. Today, when checks are just memos with account numbers and amounts, and the real information is all electronic, not so much. But technically, yes, a check has to has a correct chain of endorsements to be valid.
But were you receiving cash from the deposit? Or does it matter?
Seems like if they let you deposit a check at an ATM without an envelope or even a deposit slip, and don’t provide a pen, they can’t expect everyone to have a pen on them or have the check pre-endorsed. These days, they also allow you to deposit a check through an app on your phone by taking a picture of the check, but yeah, you have to take a pic of the front AND back. But they don’t ever even get the original check in that case, so it seems like if they can do that, they might let an unendorsed check deposit do through considering they at least have the physical check…
Am I reaching? Was it a bad idea to go through with the ATM deposit without endorsing it? T’row me a bone heah’!
Depends on the bank, and potentially on which bank the check-writer uses.
Last month I was on vacation. My employer and I happen to use the same bank (Chase), but we don’t use direct deposit. I asked at the bank, and they confirmed that our office manager could bring my paycheck to the bank and deposit it into my account. I did provide him with a deposit slip with my account number on it, but couldn’t endorse the check from 5 states away.
They told me at the bank it would be fine, and it was. Don’t know if it would have been as easy if the check had come from a different bank.
As an ex-teller, we’d usually use a special stamp if it were unsigned. IIRC it said “For Deposit Only” among other things. Sometimes this is necessary, e.g. if an employee is depositing for their boss, they can’t sign for the checks.
Obviously, cashing a check required a signature. We would also make people sign government checks, and if it were made out to “Bob and Jane Smith,” both signatures would have to be on there. Some would gripe and scream, but both signing is policy and the law, and no matter what the government would return it and take their money back if it wasn’t done right.
So: personal checks and such through the ATM, not signing probably won’t be an issue. Government, school refunds, etc. can be troublesome if you don’t sign.
And of course, if something seemed fraudulent, we’d need to compare with the signature on file.
What is the rationale for having to sign on the back in order to deposit? What extra security (or whatever) is this supposed to provide, beyond that entailed in identifying the account into which it is to be paid? Might other people be able to get away with depositing checks into my account without my knowledge, if a signature was not required? Why would that be a bad (or likely!) thing, either for me or the bank?
AFAIK, in Britain, you are not expected to sign a cheque on the back when you deposit it (though it is a while since I have actually deposited a paper cheque here).
Some banks have cell phone apps that let you take a picture of the front of a check, and thus deposit the check. I don’t believe you even take a picture of the back, so it wouldn’t matter if you endorsed it.
I’ve also written checks to other people, and deposited them in their bank account. In person, at a teller. And I didn’t endorse the check. (Although I did sign it in the usual place for the person writing the check.)
I have a friend who lives out of the country, so I occasionally receive USD checks for him. I’ve never had a problem depositing them into his account at the bank without any signature. The teller does stamp the back of the check, but those are the only checks I ever deposit in person, so I don’t know if the stamping is normal procedure or special for a signed check.
Once when visiting, without his wife, he tried to deposit a check made out to Bob and Jane Smith, and they wouldn’t take it without a signature because his wife’s name isn’t on his account. I suggested we go back to the car and (wink, wink) get his wife’s signature, but he just grabbed a deposit by mail envelope.
Without a signature, a cheque is an instrument that be used only by the designated payee. Once that payee signs it, it becomes a bearer instrument. So technically if your bank wants the maker’s bank to redeem the cheque, it has to be endorsed, or else you’d have to take it to the other bank yourself.
I have often deposited a check into my daughters’ accounts.
What is a PITA is depositing a check made out to and endorsed by, another person into your own account. A tuition refund check came made out to my daughter. She wanted it to go to me since I had paid the tuition to begin with. I thought it would be simple if she just signed the check over to me, and I could deposit it. Wrong-O. She had to physically accompany me to the bank and fill out a multiple of forms first.
When I was a teller we could accept a check that hadn’t been endorsed provided the name on the check matched the name on the account.
The banks I use now won’t accept a check that isn’t endorsed.
I use the app to take pictures of my checks to deposit them. I have to take a picture of the front and the back and the back has to include ‘for deposit only’.
I haven’t tried to deposit one without endorsing it or writing ‘for deposit only’.
I use the app to save a trip to the bank so I follow the instructions to the letter so I don’t have to take the check in.
I don’t know how picky the app is but I know if the picture isn’t clear it will reject it, as well as if there is the tiniest shadow on the check or one of the corners is bent. Yesterday I took a picture of the check laying in a printed tablecloth and it was rejected. I took it again with a solid background and it was accepted. I don’t know if it would look for the endorsement or not. I can try next time I get a check.
In 2009 the small company I own received a check for several thousand dollars. I stamped For Deposit Only on the back, along with the checking account number for my company’s account at Bank #1.
Then, by mistake, I deposited the check into my personal checking account at Bank #2, at one of their ATMs.
I called Bank #2 after I realized my error, and was told that when I deposited via ATM, they didn’t care who a check was made out to, or anything it said on the back. The card I stuck in the ATM belonged to my personal checking account, so that was where the deposit would go. And that’s just what happened. No phone calls from the bank, no nothing.
That is not an explanation, it is just restatement of the point that US banks do in fact require checks to be endorsed on the back in terms of technical gobbledegook.
It’s not just technical gobbledygook. It’s how the law says that they should operate if they want to be protected. They can bypass the rules if they don’t think it’s a huge risk, but if something unexpected happens, the party that didn’t follow the rule is getting screwed.
Back when my business still accepted checks, the majority were stamped on the back. But in each deposit there would be a few that were not stamped nor signed. The bank never complained. Small local bank.