an $800.00 question- please help!!!

[confuzzled]

sorry for my last post..... I did not see your last reply shellandty. Thank you for that.

I honestly do not remember what the check said because it was over a year & a 1/2 ago. I just remember seeing my name & also the leinholder (bank) on it.

thanks again,

 

[seniorjudge]

...Unless you can get Geico to reissue it and have the lienholder properly endorse it, the money is gone....

You are not being satirized. You got correct and accurate info in the first response.

 

[shell007]

Seniorjudge: I have posted! Thanks

OP: Sorry for my intrusion

 

[shell007]

OK...has anyone pressed Fraud charges against you?

Did you pay $800.00 to get your vehicle repaired?

If so...and you have proof that you paid for the repairs out of your account, call Geico, explain the situation to them, ask them if they will re-issue a check, endorse it properly, and then deposit accordingly.

If you had our vehicle repaired and PAID $800.00 then you should not be out the money. Unless they now deny payment because of ???? fraudulant behavior.

 

[tammy8]

Do you have proof that you fixed your car? Who fixed it? A body shop?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Do you have proof that you fixed your car? Who fixed it? A body shop?

None of this matters. The question wasn't was he entitled to the monies but the execution of the check which was fraudulent.

 

[confuzzled]

Yes, I remember the body shop that fixed my car.

No, no one has filed fraud charges against me.

Before I posted on here, fraud did not even cross my mind! My bank told me that my bank had to give Geico back the money because Geico told them the check was not "properly endorsed".

None of this matters. The question wasn't was he entitled to the monies but the execution of the check which was fraudulent.

ok.. so based on what you said here, who executed the check? me? or the my bank?

thanks.

 

[moburkes]

Yes, I remember the body shop that fixed my car.

No, no one has filed fraud charges against me.

Before I posted on here, fraud did not even cross my mind! My bank told me that my bank had to give Geico back the money because Geico told them the check was not "properly endorsed".

None of this matters. The question wasn't was he entitled to the monies but the execution of the check which was fraudulent.

ok.. so based on what you said here, who executed the check? me? or the my bank?

thanks.

You executed the check. You cashed a check that was written to 2 parties, and the bank made the mistake by allowing you to do so. The bank corrected their error, by giving the money back to GEICO.

Even though you used the money for its proper reason (to repair the vehicle), you committed fraud (even by accident) when you cashed it. I would do as someone suggested and call GEICO to see if they will help you get the problem fixed.

By the way, most claims checks are actually drafts, which is why 1 1/2 years later, they can go back into your bank account and reverse the money. On a regular check, my understanding is that there is a status of limitations of some sort, but it doesn't apply on drafts. Maybe someone else could explain better.

 

[shell007]

You executed the check. You cashed a check that was written to 2 parties, and the bank made the mistake by allowing you to do so. The bank corrected their error, by giving the money back to GEICO.

Even though you used the money for its proper reason (to repair the vehicle), you committed fraud (even by accident) when you cashed it. I would do as someone suggested and call GEICO to see if they will help you get the problem fixed.

By the way, most claims checks are actually drafts, which is why 1 1/2 years later, they can go back into your bank account and reverse the money. On a regular check, my understanding is that there is a status of limitations of some sort, but it doesn't apply on drafts. Maybe someone else could explain better.

Did the bank send the check back because THEY were a party to the check or because it merely wasn't endorsed properly. If the bank's name was not on the check, would they have done anything or nothing?

 

[moburkes]

Did the bank send the check back because THEY were a party to the check or because it merely wasn't endorsed properly. If the bank's name was not on the check, would they have done anything or nothing?

I'm guessing that GEICO was auditing their records, and that's how they found out it wasn't endorsed properly (by the payees- Op and the leinholder). That's what the OP was told by his bank. When you ask about the bank's name, I'm not sure that I understand (I did read your other post).

If you're asking if the OPs bank was BANK A, and if BANK A was also listed as a payee, then that usually doesn't happen where they bank where the person will cash the check is also listed as a payee.

I believe the bank made a mistake by cashing the check. They weren't made aware of it until recently. But since a check from an insurance company is actually a draft, they can come back for it. It protects the insurance company from fraud. It can also protect them in case they issue a check too soon (all the details weren't found out until later) that they would not have issued otherwise (for example), and then they can go back and get their money without having to sue the person who cashed the check. Kinda sneaky too that they can do this!

 

[shell007]

I'm guessing that GEICO was auditing their records, and that's how they found out it wasn't endorsed properly (by the payees- Op and the leinholder). That's what the OP was told by his bank. When you ask about the bank's name, I'm not sure that I understand (I did read your other post).

If you're asking if the OPs bank was BANK A, and if BANK A was also listed as a payee, then that usually doesn't happen where they bank where the person will cash the check is also listed as a payee.

I believe the bank made a mistake by cashing the check. They weren't made aware of it until recently. But since a check from an insurance company is actually a draft, they can come back for it. It protects the insurance company from fraud. It can also protect them in case they issue a check too soon (all the details weren't found out until later) that they would not have issued otherwise (for example), and then they can go back and get their money without having to sue the person who cashed the check. Kinda sneaky too that they can do this!

HMMM...I guess more facts are needed to figure out this one. By the way...I deleted my thread that addressed a similar (but not exact) situation. This thread has sparked my curiosity though. Now I will be the one not getting a good night's sleep!

 

[abaga]

I didn't know it at the time that they had to sign it also! I fixed the car with the insurance check. I no longer own the vehicle... and why would they wait 1 1/2 years to notify the bank that a check which has long since been cashed was not properly endorsed.

Shouldn't the bank be responsible at all for not telling me this & depositing the check?

thanks.

No, it isn't the banks responsibility. If the check was made payable to you "AND" the leinholder, then that means BOTH parties need to endorse the check...just like any other check that is made payable to two parties (using the word "AND").

Geico's auditors were probably looking through checks at random and saw the endorsement was not proper, and had it returned. This can happen. I work for a bank and I can't tell you how many times we tell people we can't deposit it because both parties have not endorsed the check (or it wasn't done properly), so therefore, the check can not be deposited. We get yelled at for not doing what the customer wants done (i.e. deposit the check). This is precisely the reason we won't deposit a check when the endorsements are improper.

Lesson learned.

 

[moburkes]

No, it isn't the banks responsibility. If the check was made payable to you "AND" the leinholder, then that means BOTH parties need to endorse the check...just like any other check that is made payable to two parties (using the word "AND").

Geico's auditors were probably looking through checks at random and saw the endorsement was not proper, and had it returned. This can happen. I work for a bank and I can't tell you how many times we tell people we can't deposit it because both parties have not endorsed the check (or it wasn't done properly), so therefore, the check can not be deposited. We get yelled at for not doing what the customer wants done (i.e. deposit the check). This is precisely the reason we won't deposit a check when the endorsements are improper.

Lesson learned.

The OPs question is how much responsibility does the bank have for allowing the transaction to take place improperly. I appreciate your input from the bank's side. I said that the bank made a mistake (allowing the check) and corrected the mistake (by pulling the money back out and giving it to Geico). You also agreed that the mistake was found due to some internal auditing by Geico.

 

[abaga]

The OPs question is how much responsibility does the bank have for allowing the transaction to take place improperly. I appreciate your input from the bank's side. I said that the bank made a mistake (allowing the check) and corrected the mistake (by pulling the money back out and giving it to Geico). You also agreed that the mistake was found due to some internal auditing by Geico.

As far as I know, it is not the banks responsibility if the check was not properly endorsed. We weren't there when the OP deposited the check...we don't know if the bank decided to deposit the check WITH THE DISCLAIMER to the account holder the check may be returned for improper endorsement.

Also, if the check was for 18 months ago, why is it the OP said this money was in his/her account for the December Mortgage? Did I misunderstand something? If so, I stand corrected.

 

[abaga]

What is the name of your state? Arizona

Hi.. I'm not sure where I should post this but here's the situation.

About 1 & 1/2 years ago I had an $800.00 check issued to me from Geico Insurance for damage done to my vehicle. The check was made payable to me and the leinholder of the vehicle. I deposited the check into my checking account.

Today, I went to the bank to open a new account and saw that $800.00 was withdrawn by the bank to give back to Geico. The bank told me that Geico told them that "the check was not properly endorsed 1 1/2 years ago,meaning, the lienholder did not sign the back of it.

I no longer own the vehicle or have Geico insurance. I have no idea what to do at this point. The $800.00 in my account was for my December's mortgage payment & now I have no idea what to do.

I don't understand how this money can be taken from me because the "check wasn't properly endorsed' 1 1/2 years ago! I was never told by my bank that the leinholder also had to sign the check.

Please advise me what to do. thank you.

So, what does your check from Geico 18 months ago have to do with your December (2005?) mortgage payment?? If you had your car fixed with the insurance money, then I don't get it...what does that have to do with your mortgage?