# Legal Recourse? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 16, 2003, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126 "2003-04-16T17:46:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![maskedman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/fbc32d/32.png) [@maskedman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/maskedman)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/1 "2003-04-16T17:46:38Z")
What should I do? I just had my home’s roof repaired by an independent contractor. NOTHING about the job went right. He was late for every appointment, was never well prepared nor organized, not good at calling me to give status reports, et. When the job was finally finished this past Saturday, I wrote him a check for $160.00 to fulfill my contractural obligation. Case closed, so I thought. The contractor calls me Sunday Night and tells me that he has lost the check. How, when or where, he doesn’t know. He stupidly pre-endorsed the check prior to losing it. So his signature, Driver’s Lisc. #, and SSN are on the back of the check. So … I call my bank to stop payment. The bank tells me that’s it has already been cashed. For $960.00. An $800.00 difference. The number ‘1’ in the amount field was forged/altered to be a ‘9’. The teller at the bank who cashed it (or the goon at a Check Cashing place) obviously didn’t check ID very carefully. They should lose their job over something like this. Kicker: My bank tells me that resolving this theft of $800.00 is between the contractor and me. I’m still waiting for the bank to provide me with a photocopy of the cashed check (both front and back). Usually takes a day or so. I’ve contacted the contractor for resolution. He wants to see the photocopy before returning my stolen $800.00. He wants to see who countersigned on the check. I don’t have the copy yet. I do have a statement from my online account showing the check # and amount debited against the account, so I do have SOME paperwork already. The contractor thinks that the check was probably stolen either from his truck or his office. Like I said, he’s not well organized. He thinks it was one of his workers. Maybe it was him. I’ve already decided to change my Account Numbers. But whoever the scumbag is who did this probably knows my name, address and phone number AND what my signature looks like. Thankfully my SSN was not on the check. Do I invest in an alarm system for my home now? Because if a check for $960.00 clears easily, maybe this guy (me) has some nice stuff at home as well. Any thoughts from the Teeming Millions while I wait for the photocopy from my bank? At what point do I get the police involved? Any lawyers here? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![andymurph64](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a88e57/32.png) [@andymurph64](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andymurph64)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/2 "2003-04-16T17:50:33Z")
Question, What was written after the $160.00. I was always under the impression banks don’t look at the number but what is written beneath it. If it says “one hundred sixty dollars and 00 cents” then I don’t see how the bank isn’t liable. IANAL ---
**Author:** ![maskedman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/fbc32d/32.png) [@maskedman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/maskedman)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/3 "2003-04-16T17:58:11Z")
I wrote out “One Hundred Sixty and 00/100 Dollars”. A teller (or Check Cash Place Goon) should have caught this if this line had been altered as I’m sure that it was. ---
**Author:** ![andymurph64](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a88e57/32.png) [@andymurph64](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andymurph64)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/4 "2003-04-16T18:37:06Z")
You’re not getting much response… ☹ I would call the police themselves and ask if they should be involved. I don’t see why they shouldn’t be involved. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/5 "2003-04-16T18:52:32Z")
Second calling the police. Like yesterday. I’d call an attorney about instituting an immediate civil action as well, against the contractor and the bank. Lost the check? Bull. Bank cashed a forged check? Their fault, not yours, they should pony up. IANAL etc. ---
**Author:** ![NotMrKnowItAll](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/6bbea6/32.png) [@NotMrKnowItAll](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotMrKnowItAll)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/6 "2003-04-16T19:07:44Z")
IANAL, but I’ve had a run in with this. The written out part (One Hundred Sixty and 00/100) is the legal amount, the numbers (160.00) is the convenience amount. AFAIK, it’s the legal amount that’s to be honored. In my case, the bank was at fault. I third you calling the police, a crime was committed. ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2003, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-recourse/169126/7 "2003-04-16T19:22:00Z")
Relevant UCC sections follow. Disclaimer. While IAAL, I’m not your lawyer, and probably am not one in your state. This is general information and not legal advice. For that, see a lawyer licensed in your state. Summary. Bank must recredit your account for the $800. The check was altered, and therefore not properly payable. Bank has a better argument with respect to the $160, because all necessary signatures were present. GIve formal notice in writing to the bank, though. PART 4. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PAYOR BANK AND ITS CUSTOMER (810 ILCS 5/4-401) Sec. 4-401. When bank may charge customer’s account. (a) A bank may charge against the account of a customer an item that is properly payable from that account even though the charge creates an overdraft. An item is properly payable if it is authorized by the customer and is in accordance with any agreement between the customer and bank. * * * ``` (d) A bank that in good faith makes payment to a holder may charge ``` the indicated account of its customer according to: (1) the original terms of the altered item; or… ``` [][][][] (810 ILCS 5/4-406) Sec. 4-406. Customer's duty to discover and report unauthorized ``` signature or alteration. (a) A bank that sends or makes available to a customer a statement of account showing payment of items for the account shall either return or make available to the customer the items paid or provide information in the statement of account sufficient to allow the customer to identify the items paid. The statement of account provides sufficient information if the item is described by item number, amount, and date of payment. (b) If the items are not returned to the customer, the person retaining the items shall either retain the items or, if the items are destroyed, maintain the capacity to furnish legible copies of the items until the expiration of 7 years after receipt of the items. A customer may request an item from the bank that paid the item, and that bank must provide in a reasonable time either the item or, if the item has been destroyed or is not otherwise obtainable, a legible copy of the item. © If a bank sends or makes available a statement of account or items pursuant to subsection (a), the customer must exercise reasonable promptness in examining the statement or the items to determine whether any payment was not authorized because of an alteration of an item or because a purported signature by or on behalf of the customer was not authorized. If, based on the statement or items provided, the customer should reasonably have discovered the unauthorized payment, the customer must promptly notify the bank of the relevant facts. (d) If the bank proves that the customer failed, with respect to an item, to comply with the duties imposed on the customer by subsection ©, the customer is precluded from asserting against the bank: (1) the customer’s unauthorized signature or any alteration on the item, if the bank also proves that it suffered a loss by reason of the failure; and (2) the customer’s unauthorized signature or alteration by the same wrongdoer on any other item paid in good faith by the bank if the payment was made before the bank received notice from the customer of the unauthorized signature or alteration and after the customer had been afforded a reasonable period of time, not exceeding 30 days, in which to examine the item or statement of account and notify the bank. (e) If subsection (d) applies and the customer proves that the bank failed to exercise ordinary care in paying the item and that the failure substantially contributed to loss, the loss is allocated between the customer precluded and the bank asserting the preclusion according to the extent to which the failure of the customer to comply with subsection © and the failure of the bank to exercise ordinary care contributed to the loss. If the customer proves that the bank did not pay the item in good faith, the preclusion under subsection (d) does not apply. (f) Without regard to care or lack of care of either the customer or the bank, a customer who does not within one year after the statement or items are made available to the customer (subsection (a)) discover and report the customer’s unauthorized signature on or any alteration on the item is precluded from asserting against the bank the unauthorized signature or alteration. If there is a preclusion under this subsection, the payor bank may not recover for breach of warranty under Section 4-208 with respect to the unauthorized signature or alteration to which the preclusion applies. (Source: P.A. 87-582; 87-1135.)