It’s not a very modern ATM. I do put it in an envelope, yes. While I don’t know how they handle deposits, I do know they empty the ATMs daily for cards left in the machine or held by the computer.
You were referring to having $200 immediately available but nothing when you see a teller. That available money is a function of using an ATM- Giving you access to some of the money until they verify the contents. That’s “conspiracy” that was being referred to that I was addressing.
I guess this is what my original question boils down to; why would a bank even allow such a scenario to occur in the first place? With the maze of rules, regulations and tedious ‘policies’ that banks drape themselves in, the existence of such a risk seems out of character.
That was an aside to the main point of the OP. I’m quite familiar with the upfront “honor system” money given by ATMs when depositing a check. I was just including it in my OP to characterize, along with the next-day availability of all of the check, the stark difference between ATM cashing and in person cashing of post-dated checks (at least at my bank).
Whatever. You were the one reacting strongly to a very good explanation that used the phrase “conspiring to break a rule with the ATM” as if you were being accused. I was merely trying to explain the poster’s turn of a phrase, since you seemed to be taking it literally.
I don’t get it. Just answered your post. But whatever right backatcha. 
Because you depositing checks via ATM is much cheaper than you depositing checks via a teller. The former can really only be done by accepting the greater risk (almost all of which is born by you, since if the check bounces they’ll take back the money if it is available and charge you fees to cover the hassle, and not them anyway) and the cheapness changes the outcome of the equation on whether the risk and operations hassle makes sense.
Speaking as a generality since I have no idea what the specific reasons the bank in question might have. It may just be a stupid situation of one hand not knowing what the other is doing. That certainly happens too.
I apologize for the poor choice of word – “conspiracy” – if that seemed derogatory. Nevertheless, when you deposit a post-dated check by ATM you are knowingly violating a rule.
I’m not sure which of the following is your real question:
[ul][li] 1. Why is the ATM process allowed to break the rule?[/li][li] 2. Why won’t the teller break the rule for me?[/li][li] 3. Why are such inconsistencies allowed to develop?[/li][/ul]
My answers are
[ul][li] 1. I don’t know.[/li][li] 2. The rule is very logical. Surely you see that.[/li][li] 3. Welcome to the real world.[/li][/ul]
I’ve actually never had issues with cashing post-dated checks (with the check-writer’s permission) at a live teller, but I guess this varies from branch to branch. A bank doesn’t have to honor the date on the check in the US except in some specific circumstances. Most of the time, the date means jack shit and it’s just out of honor that the casher holds on to it.
Anyhow, I don’t question the system, I just go straight to the ATM. Before I got a DBA, people would write checks to my business name, instead of my name (as specified in my letters and contracts to them.) Rather than bug them for a new check, I’ve always just dumped it into the ATM and never got one kicked back to me. Though I’ve never tried, I’m pretty sure a bank teller would not cash that, as the “Pay to” line is pretty important rather than the “Date” line, which is more like a memo in most cases.
How much inconvenience would be involved in arranging for the well-known, well-respected (and large) business entity to deposit the funds directly into your account?
If it’s possible at all, that is.
- 3 (or wherever we are) on the direct deposit suggestion. Paper checks are soooooooo last century.
If it’s possible, then the well-known, well-respected business entity (the US government?) would simply deposit the funds on the correct date – let’s just say the 15th of each month. The OPer has been receiving the paper check several days prior to that payment date, and wants access to the money on the day he cashes the check, not the day the check is dated.
Direct deposit would be completely inflexible.
IMO, the OPer shouldn’t complain at all. Banks aren’t in the business of offering free loans, even for just a few days. If he wants his money early, he should get a payday loan. Well, no, actually he shouldn’t do that, but you get my point. Ambivalid has discovered a loophole (the ATM), and should be happy that he has access to a few hundred bucks before the date of the check, instead of complaining that the bank won’t participate in his scheme. It’s neither the issuer’s fault nor the bank’s fault that the OPer routinely comes up short every month.
So your bank sometimes honors checks that it has no obligation to - and you’re pissed about the times it doesn’t?
Please read the OP. I don’t “routinely come up short every month”. I believe I said “every once in a while” or some close approximation. And like I’ve said more than once, I was more just curious at the discrepancy between the in-person transaction and the ATM version. But my curiosity has since been sated.
ETA: And no, it’s not “the government” sending the checks. Good guess tho.
No, it always does via ATM and it never does via in-person transaction. I just wanted to know why.
No, you wanted to rant. If you wanted to know why you would have posted this in GQ.
It’s not really a loophole or a scheme. Unless the bank has been notified beforehand, the date on the check means nothing. From Wikipedia, which agrees with what I’ve researched on this the last time post-dated checks came up on this board:
They may have an internal policy not to honoro post-dated checks, I suppose. But, simply post-dating a check does not mean a bank can’t or won’t cash it until the date the date written on the check.
Perhaps I should have posted it there.
In person, they can give you the check back and say “bank rules”, can’t do that with an ATM.
When you drop a check off at the ATM, you are placing your personal property, a financial instrument, in the care of the bank. They cannot return this property to you, nor can they get your approval to change the disposition of the property, without going through a big goat rodeo.
They don’t know if you’re across the street having lunch, or on a plane to Lisbon. They don’t know if a refusal to deposit would send you over to a check cashing place for quick money, or get you a new check cut with a correct date, or “I’ll come back in 3 days.”
They could refuse the deposit, take the money out of your account and mail you the check back. Wow, is that customer going to be hella-pissed, may as well send out the “Account Closure” forms along with the check, just to keep things tidy. Seems like it would be a lot easier to just credit the deposit.
Most people who come up short every once in a while don’t ever have the option of depositing a check early, because their check is either direct deposited or not sent 4 days too early. Consider yourself lucky that this archaic paper method is still used by this entity so that you can access the funds for a few days, to cover your shortfall.