Wheres my rent check!?! Updated Daily!

[her209]

What I still don't get is if someone else deposited the check, wouldn't a 2nd signature and account number be on the check?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Wrong move OP: be kind, the ways that people can screw you are amazing: don't make enemies.

 

[alkemyst]

What I still don't get is if someone else deposited the check, wouldn't a 2nd signature and account number be on the check?

none of it makes sense. Just like the OP talking about having the landlord reported to the police for coming by to drop off the money he 'owes' them.

It's got to be a fabricated story.

The canceled check <> the landlord actually getting the funds into his account. The judge would laugh at the OP in this especially the extreme about of legwork done to just avoid doing any legwork.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Al: you know one of those was the op reporting and the other was him Internet tough-guyin about how he don't take no shit from no LL: the second isn't a lie, it is what he "intends" to do.

 

[alkemyst]

Al: you know one of those was the op reporting and the other was him Internet tough-guyin about how he don't take no shit from no LL: the second isn't a lie, it is what he "intends" to do.

The problem I have is none of this makes sense. People bought into it because landlords are like lawyers, everyone wants to hate them. The OP's housing conditions were there when he moved in. If everyone could have a spit-polished place to live because they are paying rent, I am sure the world would smell a little better; but this ain't Disney Land and sometimes even $2500/month gets you some poorly maintained places.

All of this would have been solved with a single trip to the bank as requested.

It's doubtful the landlord is scamming, but highly probable the funds were part of a bank error.

It's been established that the checks have the same endorsement and 'account numbers' (that the OP said the bank could not give him btw) yet the money did not make it to his account for one of them. Being the check is cancelled, the account number was right, yet the funds went elsewhere = bank error.

However, since the land lord did not write the check and wasn't the check writer, he is powerless to initiate the investigation at the branch. While rare this happens more often than it should.

 

[Schfifty Five]

I think you are confused. The check was lost or stolen. The LL said his wife was in possession of the check on 2/29. She wasn't able to cash the check so she left it in her car. Where it went from there nobody knows. The LL admitted he does not have any knowledge as to who cashed the check so that would imply that it was lost/stolen.

Whether you believe this story or not is up for debate.

Anyways, I went a couple places yesterday just to cover my butt. Again, I was told that my obligation to the LL was fulfilled once he admitted that he was in possession of the check, signed the back and had his account number on the it.

Where the check went from there is not my responsibility. The LL can file a police report and I will comply with whatever the authorities want me to do which includes filing an affidavit of forgery. As of right now there is no reason for me to waste my time and energy running around places for the LL. He has not been up front and honest this entire time. I will not be pulled into any disputes he may be having with other parties regarding this check unless the police or bank asked me to do so. As of this point neither a bank or police have told me to fill out anything.

Update 3/17

Got this follow up text from the LL last night

LL: Joe I am free tomorrow and sunday to drop off the money for the standard protection plan and half the difference of the oil bill and have the document signed so that your money can be returned into your account and march payment can be properly made. Please let me know if tomorrow or Sunday works for you. The sooner we can put this to rest the better. This situation can be resolved so easily and luckily your money was located.

I did not respond. I really hope he shows up on the property. I'll call the cops and then we can have a report on record that he is in violation of the lease - quiet enjoyment.

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.

 

[FoBoT]

if TJ had handed LL a stack of 25 $100 bills (gotten a reciept/video taped the transaction etc)
then the LL gave the stack of 25 $100 bills to his wife and told her to deposit it into their bank
then the LL contacts TJ a week later and says "your rent never got deposited to my account" you gotta pay me again

?
then what?
huh???

 

[abaez]

Wrong thread.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Money located?

Without more details, this indicates that some tied to LL fessed up rather that being exposed and having a issue at Chase

 

[Brainonska511]

LL: Joe I am free tomorrow and sunday to drop off the money for the standard protection plan and half the difference of the oil bill and have the document signed so that your money can be returned into your account and march payment can be properly made. Please let me know if tomorrow or Sunday works for you. The sooner we can put this to rest the better. This situation can be resolved so easily and luckily your money was located. I did not respond. I really hope he shows up on the property. I'll call the cops and then we can have a report on record that he is in violation of the lease - quiet enjoyment.

I don't know about following through on this part.

Weird that he said "luckily your money located." If you do respond, you should say that it isn't your money that is being searched for, but the landlord's.

 

[etrigan420]

if TJ had handed LL a stack of 25 $100 bills (gotten a reciept/video taped the transaction etc)
then the LL gave the stack of 25 $100 bills to his wife and told her to deposit it into their bank
then the LL contacts TJ a week later and says "your rent never got deposited to my account" you gotta pay me again

?
then what?
huh???

This.

Oh, and somehow in this scenario, it's TJ's responsibility to get the stack of bills back from LL's wife (???).

 

[DCal430]

if TJ had handed LL a stack of 25 $100 bills (gotten a reciept/video taped the transaction etc)
then the LL gave the stack of 25 $100 bills to his wife and told her to deposit it into their bank
then the LL contacts TJ a week later and says "your rent never got deposited to my account" you gotta pay me again

?
then what?
huh???

BIG Difference is the OP Could recover the funds from the check by going to the bank and telling them the check was stolen, he couldn't recover the stack of bills by telling them it was stolen. That is the difference that many here are ignoring. The OP is doing a lot of leg work to avoid doing any work in getting the LL his money again. He is going way out of his way so the LL doesn't get the money.

 

[manimal]

The problem I have is none of this makes sense. People bought into it because landlords are like lawyers, everyone wants to hate them. The OP's housing conditions were there when he moved in. If everyone could have a spit-polished place to live because they are paying rent, I am sure the world would smell a little better; but this ain't Disney Land and sometimes even $2500/month gets you some poorly maintained places.

All of this would have been solved with a single trip to the bank as requested.

It's doubtful the landlord is scamming, but highly probable the funds were part of a bank error.

It's been established that the checks have the same endorsement and 'account numbers' (that the OP said the bank could not give him btw) yet the money did not make it to his account for one of them. Being the check is cancelled, the account number was right, yet the funds went elsewhere = bank error.

However, since the land lord did not write the check and wasn't the check writer, he is powerless to initiate the investigation at the branch. While rare this happens more often than it should.

I reckon as well. The op has taken too much pleasure in how many responses he has had. I normally dont like to call people trolls normally.


sorry watched Dora with my kids this morning after we played outside.

 

[foghorn67]

Yeah, this is suspicious. I don't know anybody except scatterbrains to pursue it to the point the OP has. Normal folks would have left it at the Chase verified endorsements and the LL said he had check in hand.
What's the point? How much time do you have to dick around with bullshit?

 

[God Mode]

All of yous have mental problems.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

The OP's housing conditions were there when he moved in.

no doubt, houses are 'as is' when you move in unless you negotiate otherwise. This is a very important thing to know before you move into a house you didn't check out properly.

It's doubtful the landlord is scamming, but highly probable the funds were part of a bank error.

I'll grant that; despite the LL misrepresenting the situation at the beginning.

He is powerless to initiate the investigation at the branch.

But is the LL entirely powerless to deal with the problem sans OP?

 

[DCal430]

no doubt, houses are 'as is' when you move in unless you negotiate otherwise. This is a very important thing to know before you move into a house you didn't check out properly.

I'll grant that; despite the LL misrepresenting the situation at the beginning.

But is the LL entirely powerless to deal with the problem sans OP?

The OP is the only one who can fix the problem since he is the one who wrote the check. If the OP had spent the time he did avoiding helping, helping instead the problem would have been fixed. The OP deliberately went out of his way to not help and ensure the LL is screwed, that makes him a bigger ass than the LL.

 

[DCal430]

Imagine someone paid you with a check, you loose it, and ask them to cancel it and write a new one. They refuse and say they already wrote you a check and too bad. This is like that the OP has done. He could undo the check deposit and write a new one but chooses not to. Much like the person in my example could cancel the check, but chooses not to

 

[BoomerD]

Imagine someone paid you with a check, you loose it, and ask them to cancel it and write a new one. They refuse and say they already wrote you a check and too bad. This is like that the OP has done. He could undo the check deposit and write a new one but chooses not to. Much like the person in my example could cancel the check, but chooses not to

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.

 

[DCal430]

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.

It is actually very easy to undo a deposit from a check. I have seen it happen on more than one occasion. The bank wouldn't be reimbursing you, it would be taking the money out of the account it was deposited into and giving it back to you. The bank can in fact pull the money out of the account it deposited the check into.

One case I know it was months after the check was deposited and the funds were reversed out, because the issuing bank said the check was stolen and signature forged.

The OP has his bank remove the funds from the bank it was deposited into showing the check was stolen. The bank the funds were deposited into would then remove the funds from the person who deposited the check. This happens all the time.

 

[alkemyst]

if TJ had handed LL a stack of 25 $100 bills (gotten a reciept/video taped the transaction etc)
then the LL gave the stack of 25 $100 bills to his wife and told her to deposit it into their bank
then the LL contacts TJ a week later and says "your rent never got deposited to my account" you gotta pay me again

?
then what?
huh???

That is not the case here. With cash and a receipt though you are set. Dude walks out and gets robbed in front of you, to bad, so sad.

In this case the check ended up in another account and the landlord just needs the OP to start the recovery process.

 

[SparkyJJO]

That is not the case here. With cash and a receipt though you are set. Dude walks out and gets robbed in front of you, to bad, so sad.

In this case the check ended up in another account and the landlord just needs the OP to start the recovery process.

Just stop.

 

[etrigan420]

It is actually very easy to undo a deposit from a check. I have seen it happen on more than one occasion. The bank wouldn't be reimbursing you, it would be taking the money out of the account it was deposited into and giving it back to you. The bank can in fact pull the money out of the account it deposited the check into.

One case I know it was months after the check was deposited and the funds were reversed out, because the issuing bank said the check was stolen and signature forged.

The OP has his bank remove the funds from the bank it was deposited into showing the check was stolen. The bank the funds were deposited into would then remove the funds from the person who deposited the check. This happens all the time.

The OP's bank doesn't give 2 shits about who deposited the check. A request for payment was made from a particular account, and they paid it from that account. Verifying the "Pay to the Order of" portion of the check is the responsibility of the *RECEIVING FINANCIAL INSTITUTION*.

The OP's bank will *not* pull funds out of an account simply at the OP's request. You can think it's going to happen, you can wish for it to happen, you can even say that "it happens all the time"...but it doesn't, and it wont.

 

[DCal430]

The OP's bank doesn't give 2 shits about who deposited the check. A request for payment was made from a particular account, and they paid it from that account. Verifying the "Pay to the Order of" portion of the check is the responsibility of the *RECEIVING FINANCIAL INSTITUTION*.

The OP's bank will *not* pull funds out of an account simply at the OP's request. You can think it's going to happen, you can wish for it to happen, you can even say that "it happens all the time"...but it doesn't, and it wont.

YOU ARE WRONG, it does happen. The OP bank can reverse the deposit. It does happen all the time. When a check is lost or stolen the paying bank can undo the payment in an instant, the receiving bank must take the funds then from the account it was put in. They are NOT just pulling funds out of an account they are reversing a deposit. You can stay ignorant of this if you want, but you are still WRONG.

I have seen this happen, and I know people who have worked at banks and seen this happen. Anyone who knows anything about banking know you are wrong.

 

[etrigan420]

YOU ARE WRONG, it does happen. The OP bank can reverse the deposit. It does happen all the time. When a check is lost or stolen the paying bank can undo the payment in an instant, the receiving bank must take the funds then from the account it was put in. They are NOT just pulling funds out of an account they are reversing a deposit. You can stay ignorant of this if you want, but you are still WRONG.

I have seen this happen, and I know people who have worked at banks and seen this happen. Anyone who knows anything about banking know you are wrong.

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?