Using Banks and Bank Accounts/Check cashing fees for non-customers
Alex Bansure wrote at 2008-08-04 23:21:23
It is a ripoff. Don't try to defend it as legal. What the banks are really doing is taking advantage who don't use bank accounts such as migrant farm workers. Now I hear that B of A is raising it to $6.
Jake wrote at 2009-02-19 03:22:37
Compass Bank now charges 10% of the face value of the check... Thats to cash one of their own checks! I think that's outrageous!
ga-tortilla wrote at 2009-04-30 19:34:01
I think the check cashing fee is absurd.
I can't see how it is legal to deny a debtee the entire amount of $ they are owed by the debtor.
To state this is for noncustomers is coercive at best.
I have no legal or binding contract with the bank since I am not their customer, but the bank does have a legal responsibility to give me the money specificed on the promisary note(check).
When I get more time I plan to pursue this further to find out if/how a bank can legally require met to pay them for not being their customer.
Benito Flores wrote at 2009-07-15 01:30:30
What is the point to participate in this forum? you can not write your email, you can not organize together to fix thia bank abusive fee.
i have good ideas of how to fight this illegal fee but i am really discouraged, so one write his ideas here and then what?
this forum acomplished nothing
m wrote at 2009-10-10 21:15:13
What is a financial institution's obligation with respect to cashing a check for a person who is not its customer? Nobody would seriously question a bank that refused a stranger's request to cash a check that is drawn on another bank. But if the non-customer wants to cash an "on-us" check, the situation may be different.
As any teller knows, one of the most common examples of this situation is an employee who seeks to cash a payroll check that is drawn on the employer's account at the bank. Does the bank expose itself to potential liability if it refuses to cash the check in such a situation? The answer to that question depends on whether the bank's refusal constitutes a "wrongful dishonor" of the check.
Under UCC §3-502(b)(2), if a bank taking a check over the counter fails to pay that check by the end of the day on which it is presented, the bank has dishonored the check. Assuming that the check is otherwise properly payable and there are sufficient funds in the account to cover it, that dishonor is probably "wrongful." Thus, the bank's customer could maintain an action against it under UCC §4-402(b) for the damages caused by that dishonor, including potential consequential damages.
Although there are a few isolated decisions to the contrary, the generally accepted view is that the payee of a check has no cause of action against a bank for refusing to cash a check.
One of the few reported decisions touching on this issue is Your Style Publications, Inc. v. Mid Town Bank & Trust Company of Chicago. In that case, Mid Town Bank had a policy of charging a 2% service fee for cashing checks for non-customers. Your Style maintained an account at MidTown Bank, and one of its employees sought to cash his payroll check there. The check appeared to be properly payable and Your Style's account had sufficient funds to cover the check. After the bank deducted its 2% service fee, both Your Style and the employee sued MidTown alleging wrongful dishonor, breach of contract, misrepresentation, and breach of contract as to third party beneficiaries.
The court began by finding that the bank had, in fact, dishonored the check by refusing to cash it without deducting the service fee.
It then held that dishonor to be wrongful because the check was otherwise properly payable and the account contained sufficient funds.
R Vautour wrote at 2010-03-20 20:59:28
This is absolutely unacceptable. I was completely unaware of this practice as I generally just deposit my checks to my account. Today, as my bank was closed as of three o'clock, I decided to go to [b]CITIZEN'S BANK[/b] the issuing bank. I expected to have to show ID but telling me I had to pay five dollars for the privilege of having a bank cash a check drawn from their bank is highway robbery and I won't do it. It's a bunch of bullshit! Obviously, it's not the five dollars. If I went to a middle-man check cashing establishment, I would expect them to charge me a fee as they have to get paid for their services but the bank should not be allowed to charge fees in this way. I refuse to "bend over" for this type of crap.
When I got home I decided to look on line and see if I could find out more about this practice of charging non-customers for cashing checks drawn on their bank. Apparently, this is a pretty wide spread practice judging by the amount of information and the number of banks involved as well as the number of pissed off people on the many pages I've looked at. This is retarded, unethical, and just another example of corporate greed. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised after the wonderful vacation the corporate top-dogs got to take on our tax money via the government bail out recently.
In my opinion, the people making these types of decisions should be jailed. This is extortion and should not be tolerated. I'm an freelancer/independent contractor and I frequently accept contracts from staffing companies if the opportunity is right. Obviously, I can continue to deposit the checks I receive into my bank account and wait for them to clear - which is what I typically do anyways. However, I'd like to think that, if I suddenly had the need to cash it at the source, I wouldn't have to open up a new account with a new bank every time I take a new contract with another headhunter.
Everyone who is able to should absolutely refuse to pay this under any circumstances and we should all be actively trying to have this practice outlawed. I find it hard to believe (and not so hard to believe) that it isn't already.
moralityamust wrote at 2011-06-21 22:19:33
Longmont, Co., The business I work for banks at Bank of the West, we received a notice they will be charging a $5.00 fee, I called 1st National bank which was bought out by Omaha, they don't charge but Omaha does, so I think it is coming. If I find a bank that does not charge, I will change banks.
JTW wrote at 2012-03-18 19:02:22
If banks are going to charge non-customers to cash a check drawn on the banks own accounts then they should be required to EXPLICITLY state on the check itself that it WILL NOT BE HONORED FOR THE CHECKS FACE VALUE. Whatever 'service' the bank is providing, is being provided for the banks customers and should be the responsibility of the account holder not the holder of the check who accepts the check in good faith - trusting that their debtors institution of credit is acting in good faith and will honor the check for the face value. An EXPLICIT statement of the ACTUAL VALUE that the check will be redeemed for would allow the receiver of the check to charge the bank's clients the TRUE COST of the transaction and adjust the fee that they will charge the banks customer accordingly. The bank is not providing the non-customer a service... They are fulfilling their obligation to redeem the promissory note of their clients. It is not a 'service' to me as a non-customer... it is an inconvenience and an outrage.
Danno wrote at 2014-03-03 00:28:44
JTW nailed this down. No need for further input. Just complete agreement !!!!