Wheres my rent check!?! Updated Daily!

[FoBoT]

All of yous have mental problems.

 

[DCal430]

I never said they *couldn't*. I said they *wouldn't*, and they wont. Not without a court order at least.

THE CHECK HAS BEEN PAID. What about that do you not understand? The depositing institution has completed their end of the deal.

I know a dude that worked at a bank once, and he *never* did this, so there's my anecdotal evidence.

Who is passing out the "full retard" juice today?

Wrong wrong wrong, they don't need a court order. You are clueless. This is done every day with stolen and lost checks and it is funny you think they won't do it without a court order.

 

[sactoking]

Wrong wrong wrong, they don't need a court order. You are clueless. This is done every day with stolen and lost checks and it is funny you think they won't do it without a court order.

In this case the check cannot be proved to be lost or stolen. From the OP's viewpoint the check was written to an individual, that individual endorsed the check, and it was deposited. The OP is under no obligation to know if the receiving account belongs to the proper recipient. If the draftor of the check tries to put a stop payment on a cleared check the bank will not do it. The draftor will be required to report the check as lost or stolen. Howver, that requires knowing that it was lost or stolen, otherwise they're filing a false report and committing a misdemeanor and possibly facilitating financial fraud. Given that the LL has already lied to the OP the OP is under absolutely no obligation to take the LL at his word on anything and stick his own neck on the line.

 

[etrigan420]

Wrong wrong wrong, they don't need a court order. You are clueless. This is done every day with stolen and lost checks and it is funny you think they won't do it without a court order.

So I guess we're done then. You're going to claim that something happens, and use no actual evidence to prove that it does...I think it's relatively clear which one of us is "clueless".

Why don't you write me a check for $2500, I'll make sure that it gets deposited into someones account, then you try and get your bank to refund the deposit...

I triple dog dare you.

 

[DCal430]

In this case the check cannot be proved to be lost or stolen. From the OP's viewpoint the check was written to an individual, that individual endorsed the check, and it was deposited. The OP is under no obligation to know if the receiving account belongs to the proper recipient. If the draftor of the check tries to put a stop payment on a cleared check the bank will not do it. The draftor will be required to report the check as lost or stolen. Howver, that requires knowing that it was lost or stolen, otherwise they're filing a false report and committing a misdemeanor and possibly facilitating financial fraud. Given that the LL has already lied to the OP the OP is under absolutely no obligation to take the LL at his word on anything and stick his own neck on the line.

Just claim the check was lost in the mail. The bank doesn't know it wasn't. No big deal to lie.

 

[DCal430]

So I guess we're done then. You're going to claim that something happens, and use no actual evidence to prove that it does...I think it's relatively clear which one of us is "clueless".

Why don't you write me a check for $2500, I'll make sure that it gets deposited into someones account, then you try and get your bank to refund the deposit...

I triple dog dare you.

I can guarantee you if I told the bank the check was lost in the mail and deposited by a thief they will reverse the deposit, but you just don't grasp this. You are clueless.

 

[abaez]

In this case the check cannot be proved to be lost or stolen. From the OP's viewpoint the check was written to an individual, that individual endorsed the check, and it was deposited. The OP is under no obligation to know if the receiving account belongs to the proper recipient. If the draftor of the check tries to put a stop payment on a cleared check the bank will not do it. The draftor will be required to report the check as lost or stolen. Howver, that requires knowing that it was lost or stolen, otherwise they're filing a false report and committing a misdemeanor and possibly facilitating financial fraud. Given that the LL has already lied to the OP the OP is under absolutely no obligation to take the LL at his word on anything and stick his own neck on the line.

But the check is lost and stolen - it did not get deposited into the account written on the back. The OP has confirmed this. No matter what happened it did not get routed to the account endorsed and no bank would say that that is not enough to reverse the deposit.

 

[etrigan420]

I can guarantee you if I told the bank the check was lost in the mail and deposited by a thief they will reverse the deposit, but you just don't grasp this. You are clueless.

So put up, or shut up.

Your idiocy knows no bounds...

 

[BUTCH1]

In a nutshell the LL has a beef with his bank, period. He should co to his bank and show where it was deposited but never credited to his account, How could a thief steal it and successfully deposit it to his/her account when the LL's acct.# and signature is clearly on the check?. The fact that he lied about even having possession of it rings out "I'm a lying, scheming, POS" blow this asshole off, stat...

 

[DCal430]

So put up, or shut up.

Your idiocy knows no bounds...

I don't need to prove anything to you, you are really stupid. So very stupid you are.

 

[DCal430]

So put up, or shut up.

Your idiocy knows no bounds...

It is beyond clear to me that you know absolutely nothing about banking and how checks are deposited.

 

[esquared]

So put up, or shut up.

Your idiocy knows no bounds...

It is beyond clear to me that you know absolutely nothing about banking and how checks are deposited.

Alright you two. Knock it off.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I am both cluelessly sans knowledge of money and without bounds to my idiocy.

And you are talking cross purposes.

 

[alkemyst]

Just stop.

Just stop what? being honest that if I deposit a check of my own and somehow that the bank puts it into the wrong account (one that is not mine), I have no recourse?

That action is no different than me depositing a check that was not my own, only that now the bank is not going to talk to me on it since I didn't write that check and I don't own the account it ended up in.

But you can do your little dance in the lobby that you got some free monies while it lasts.

 

[abaez]

In a nutshell the LL has a beef with his bank, period. He should co to his bank and show where it was deposited but never credited to his account, How could a thief steal it and successfully deposit it to his/her account when the LL's acct.# and signature is clearly on the check?. The fact that he lied about even having possession of it rings out "I'm a lying, scheming, POS" blow this asshole off, stat...

Check wasn't deposited at LL's bank. It was deposited/cleared at a different bank from both LL and OP.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Marked.

 

[Gibson486]

This could have been a very successful bait...

 

[alkemyst]

Check wasn't deposited at LL's bank. It was deposited/cleared at a different bank from both LL and OP.

I don't think the others want to hear this logic. I saw this myself and others think I am deranged and even feel I am lying about how banks already thought this issue out.

 

[TangoJuliet]

For those trying to keep track here are the facts

LL had check no later then 2/29.
Wife tried to deposit on 2/29
OP contacted by LL saying never got check
Check clears OP account on 3/5
Check has LL's account number and signature on it
Check does not have a deposit stamp - meaning it was deposited by ATM or Mobile App
OP's bank does investigation and shows receiving bank is JP Morgan Chase
LL says his bank is HSBC and not Chase
LL admits nobody he knows deposited the check
OP goes to his bank/police and both say renter's obligations have been met
Since it is no longer the OP's obligation the OP asks to be compensated for time spent/wasted
LL disagrees to compensation
OP ceases communications with LL

I did a couple things yesterday to cover my butt. I do not want to disclose that information here. I did speak with another person who deals with LL/tenant disagreements and she said once the check has been received/signed it is no longer the tenants responsibility.

Now, for those keeping score at home. The LL has still not filed any paperwork saying the check was lost/stolen. He has not admitted that it has been lost or stolen either. All he has admitted to was that he does not know where the check went and does not know who deposited it. Since he has lied to me in the past I do not believe him.

 

[alkemyst]

For those trying to keep track here are the facts

LL had check no later then 2/29.
Wife tried to deposit on 2/29
OP contacted by LL saying never got check
Check clears OP account on 3/5
Check has LL's account number and signature on it
Check does not have a deposit stamp - meaning it was deposited by ATM or Mobile App
OP's bank does investigation and shows receiving bank is JP Morgan Chase
LL says his bank is HSBC and not Chase
LL admits nobody he knows deposited the check
OP goes to his bank/police and both say renter's obligations have been met
Since it is no longer the OP's obligation the OP asks to be compensated for time spent/wasted
LL disagrees to compensation
OP ceases communications with LL

I did a couple things yesterday to cover my butt. I do not want to disclose that information here. I did speak with another person who deals with LL/tenant disagreements and she said once the check has been received/signed it is no longer the tenants responsibility.

Now, for those keeping score at home. The LL has still not filed any paperwork saying the check was lost/stolen. He has not admitted that it has been lost or stolen either. All he has admitted to was that he does not know where the check went and does not know who deposited it. Since he has lied to me in the past I do not believe him.

this doesn't match above story here at all...

 

[dud]

this doesn't match above story here at all...

Give the OP a break ... this is a developing story and he is writing it just for you.

 

[TangoJuliet]

What is this supposed to mean?

Isn't that what you've been trying to find out from the start of this thread? And all of a sudden he sends you a text saying it's been magically located? TJ, can you go into anymore detail on that? As far as I can tell from this thread, the money was always in limbo until this latest update from you.

I think he was saying that his account did not get the rent monies so therefore its still my money.

Your scenario would be fine IF the person hadn't signed the check and the funds were already taken out of your account.

Good luck getting the bank to reimburse your account in this case. It's kind of tough to stop payment on a check that's already been cashed by your bank.

Thats exactly right. The LL was in possession of the check and admitted that he signed it and put his account number on the back. The signature and account number are exactly the same as the previous month's rent check. The check has already cleared my account and if there was a "bank error" it would have been corrected and the funds transferred either back to my account or to the LL's account. I have not been credited with anything and to my knowledge neither has the LL's.

In this case the check cannot be proved to be lost or stolen. From the OP's viewpoint the check was written to an individual, that individual endorsed the check, and it was deposited. The OP is under no obligation to know if the receiving account belongs to the proper recipient. If the draftor of the check tries to put a stop payment on a cleared check the bank will not do it. The draftor will be required to report the check as lost or stolen. Howver, that requires knowing that it was lost or stolen, otherwise they're filing a false report and committing a misdemeanor and possibly facilitating financial fraud. Given that the LL has already lied to the OP the OP is under absolutely no obligation to take the LL at his word on anything and stick his own neck on the line.

Exactly. The LL has not told me that the check was lost/stolen. The LL wants me to fill out the affidavit but if I put down information that is false then I will be committing a misdemeanor and possibly facilitating financial fraud (which is stated on the bottom of the form).

I have asked the LL numerous times to fill out a police report that it was lost/stolen and he refuses to do so.

 

[EagleKeeper]

this doesn't match above story here at all...

What is the problem with the TJ synopsis above?

Last week, I ran the same scenario through my bank and they came up with the same conclusion

 

[TangoJuliet]

this doesn't match above story here at all...

I told the events here as they transpired. I listed those facts as how they are right now. What doesn't match??

 

[dud]

I told the events here as they transpired. I listed those facts as how they are right now. What doesn't match??

Give Alky a break ... he lives vicariously through others ... and right now that is you!