It became such and issue for me with another company i was involved with that we ended up using a service that (conveniently or ironically) the bank offers to protect against this kind of stuff. The name varies bank to bank but basically when you do check runs, you upload that information to the bank and only those checks will be honoured and within a certain timeframe. it was quite expensive but having to deal with fraud issues all the time is too …
> On Mar 17, 2017, at 11:31 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Also, I found out if you have a double signature requirement on checks and > someone sends one through with only one signature, the bank does not give a > crap. > > -----Original Message----- From: Rory Conaway > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:26 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Speaking of banks and banking > > I believe you have about 60 days maximum to file claims. After that you are > basically screwed with the way the laws are written. I tell you this from > experience. > > Rory > > -----Original Message----- > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 1:02 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Speaking of banks and banking > > Yeah, the one guy that signed his own name to one of the checks signed it > with a decent enough signature that the graphologists can match it up to many > other examples of his signature that are available in public records. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Moffett > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:00 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Speaking of banks and banking > > Yeah, I'm guessing if they wrote checks to themselves then you know exactly > who to make a claim against. I'm sure Chuck has weighed the options though. > > >> >> >> Surely that's some kind of crime with a statute of limitations of more >> than >> 60 days. >> >> ~Seth >
