One of the guy’s stupider friends? “Can you BELIEVE what he did, he had all this money and he didn’t” etc etc. Word then gets around.
Next up on Channel Zero News at 10: this local man is being called a “hero” after he finds a losing scratch-off lottery ticket in a convenience store parking lot—and turns it in!
I like these headlines, but this story is even more stupid than that. It is about someone who didn’t break the law. So the series of articles would have to be something like,
“McDonald’s employee late for work - but keeps car under the speed limit!”
“Unhappy person offered ecstacy sure to cheer them up. They decline drug!”
“Mother’s screaming infant inconsolable, but she refuses to shake it!”
It’s possible the check could have been bearer paper. Any time you sign a check made payable to you with just your name on the back and nothing else (which is how most people will do it), you’ve made a “blank indorsement” and just changed your instrument from order paper to bearer paper. If you subsequently lose it, the finder finds bearer paper.
Gee, did he think to document the banking/account information on the check? That would be quite an account to steal from. He had the account, routing number, name and address info; he could find a way to get some money from it. THAT would be a great follow up story!
About the only thing any of us mere mortals could do with that information would be to deposit money to the account. Is that the kind of “great follow up story” you had in mind?
Because I really don’t see how any of us could do anything else with the info.
Yes, in that case the check is technically “legal tender.” But what bank is going to cash it? Have you gone into a bank - even your own bank - with a check in hand for a very large amount in the last several years? The first thing the bank does it make sure you have at least that much in your account, and they put a hold on the amount. Then and only then will they hand over the money.
It takes a little longer for your own bank to clear the check because they’re making sure that the drawee bank will honor and accept the check after they transfer it to them. If the drawee dishonors the check and your depositary bank has already paid you, they’re left holding the bag. On the other hand, if that same check is presented directly across the counter for immediate payment to the local branch of the drawee bank without any alterations or forgeries, they’re required to honor and accept it by the end of the business day so long as there are adequate funds in the drawer’s account. If it’s a certified check, it’s already accepted; payment by the drawee is guaranteed. If Mr. Damone had found a check with a blank endorsement and taken it immediately to the drawee bank, he could have ended the day significantly richer than he started out.
Most banks won’t cash a check if you don’t have an account with them. Are you on a different side of the Atlantic than I am? Something has to account for our very different views of banking reality.
In general, in the US if someone makes out a Wells Fargo check to you, Wells Fargo will cash it for you if you don’t have an account there- they will make sure the funds are there and will get your ID and thumbprint, but will cash it. This is why its always best to cash a check that may be dubious at their bank, not yours. An 185,000 check, however, is a different story altogether…
It’s Christmas dammit! We’re going to warm your stinkin’ hearts whether you like it or not. It’s still better than watching “It’s a Wonderful Life”.
Would you mind providing a cite for this? I know that it is standard practice, but I thought that it was up to the agreement the bank has with the drawer, not a legal requirement. In fact, I thought I remembered reading (perhaps on the SDMB) that some banks were now altering their account agreements and refusing to cash even their own checks if the bearer doesn’t have an account there.
I’m especially surprised that the drawee bank would be required to honor a check with a blank endorsement immediately even if they believe the bearer may not have obtained it in the customary way.
That’s certainly how things used to be. In fact, in decades past I didn’t bother having a checking account because I was. . . .living below the radar, so to speak. . . and when I did get a check, which wasn’t often, I knew I could go to the bank the check was drawn on.
However, more and more banks are now refusing to cash checks for people who don’t have accounts with them. As you know, banks are not our friends, and apparently this refusal is something they are allowed to do, so they do.
I guess I’m out of the check cashing loop as well, as I did not know this- last time I cashed a check at another bank was several years ago. I assume this is how all those check cashing places stay in business…
I found this out when I gave a check to some workmen a few years ago. He said his checking account was closed and my bank wouldn’t cash his check because he didn’t have an account there , and could I please give him cash?
I have subsequently seen signs in banks to the effect that checks are cashed only for account holders.
I think it sucks, but banks do whatever they want. Hell, in England you can’t cash a check. You can deposit it but you have to then withdraw the money from your account - once that check clears - from your account.
I remember when we used cash most of the time. Sigh.
I found this out when I gave a check to some workmen a few years ago. He said his checking account was closed and my bank wouldn’t cash his check because he didn’t have an account there , and could I please give him cash?
I have subsequently seen signs in banks to the effect that checks are cashed only for account holders.
I think it sucks, but banks do whatever they want. Hell, in England you can’t cash a check. You can deposit it but you have to then withdraw the money from your account - once that check clears.
I remember when we used cash most of the time. Sigh.
But we’re not mere mortals! We’re Dopers!
You’re saying that with this guy’s name, address, bank account, routing number, and presumably a copy of his signature, some unscrupulous person couldn’t take advantage of that information? Now I find it hard to believe anyone would be able to drain this guy’s account, but they could at least get a couple bills paid.
True. Paying bills online with that info would be a cinch. But also traceable, so I’m guessing ultimately not a good idea. 
That’s correct. The instrument doesn’t have to be paid, it has to be either honored and accepted or dishonored and returned, after which the holder can pursue the maker or indorser for payment. The payee bank can return it, cash it, allow him to put it in his brand new account with them, whatever. That’s for a regular check, mind you; if it’s a cashier’s check, as is often the case with large amounts, they’ve already accepted the check. Acceptance and payment are two different things. They may refuse to cash regular non-customer checks because or the danger of forgery, but if he’s got a check with a non-forged blank endorsement, he’s got title and possession, and if it’s a cashier’s check, he’s got the next best thing to cash money. That’s why you never, never sign a check with a blank endorsement until you’re at the bank counter and never, never send a check with a blank endorsement in the mail.
It seems unlikely, but the holder could even put it in his depository bank, let it clear, and then withdraw the whole thing in the form of a cashier’s check made out to him. A guy named Patrick Combs did exactly that with a “junk check” he deposited as a joke. The guy in the OP might not have been able to deposit or cash it, but then again it’s not impossible that he might have, or at least done some mischief with it. At the very least he saved her a headache.