«

On 7/19/2011 10:52 PM, tony cooper wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 19:55:00 -0400, Alan Browne
> <> wrote:
>
>>
>> There is no logic for it. I recall in one my first jobs, before direct
>> deposit, where I would walk to the bank every other Thursday and a
>> couple engineers would thrust their paycheques at me and ask me to
>> deposit them (same bank). They'd simply write "for deposit only" on the
>> back with the account number. Done. I'd bring back the deposit
>> receipts. Sometimes I'd ask one of them to do the same for me.
>>
>> Don't need to see a balance. Just a receipt for the deposited amount is
>> fine.
>>
>>> A few years ago my wife opened a new account at a bank near her
>>> office. She doesn't like to carry cash around, and wanted a nearby
>>> bank (our main bank is not nearby) in order to withdraw cash when
>>> needed. A couple of weeks later I went by that bank and tried to
>>> deposit $100 in cash in her account.
>>>
>>> I have a driver's license with the same address, I know her social
>>> security number, and I had a check with me showing we had a joint
>>> account at another bank. No good.
>>> She had to come with me to the bank to fill out a form adding me to
>>> the account.
>>
>> Strange these banks. They should keep money in but not keep it out.
>>
>> I can _almost_ understand not depositing a personal cheque as it could
>> screw up a persons account and cost fees if it bounced.
>
> There is a certain logic to it. Your account is personal. If money
> ended up in your account that you didn't put there, and something
> later came up where a crime or bribery was charged, you'd be in a
> vulnerable position. Conversely, any prosecutor would want to be able
> to say if deposits were made you must have made them. If an IRS audit
> shows you have a great deal of money in the bank, they don't want you
> claiming you had no knowledge of the deposits.
>
> I know that's a long shot, but banks have to have black and white
> rules. Something is allowed or it isn't. It's easier for the banks
> to make the "it isn't" rule.
>

I used to deal with several banks. My wife one made a large deposit for
me. Problem was that she put the wrong account number on the deposit
slip. Fortunately, the owner of the account that received the deposit
was an honorable person and the mesas was easily straightened out.



--
Peter

In article <200720110331438824%>,
d says...
>
> In article <>, tony cooper
> <> wrote:
>
> > >> You would not be allowed to deposit anything in a person's account at
> > >> my bank if you are not on the account. Not cash, not a certified
> > >> gov't check, not anything.
> > >
> > >get a different bank.
> > >
> > >all banks allow deposits to an account with properly endorsed checks.
> >
> > Interesting the way you say "all banks allow" when I have had just the
> > opposite experience.
>
> your bank is the oddball.

I don't recall ever being asked for ID when depositing money. All they
ever wanted was a properly filled out deposit slip. I can't see any
reason why one would need an ID to make a deposit.

> > >businesses do it all the time. do you think the lowly secretary who
> > >goes to the bank with a stack of checks is listed on the corporate
> > >account? the checks are deposited and that's that.
> >
> > That's a business account. This is about a personal account. Alan
> > was referring to a personal account.
>
> it's *any* account.
>
> > >or just use a smartphone to make a deposit. why even bother going to a
> > >bank at all.
> >
> > A check can be mailed in, and the sender is then assumed to be the
> > account holder.
>
> that's true but it's much easier and significantly faster with a phone.

How do you deposit cash or a check with a smartphone? Have I missed
some kind of new technology?

On Jul 20, 3:52*am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 19:55:00 -0400, Alan Browne
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> >There is no logic for it. *I recall in one my first jobs, before direct
> >deposit, where I would walk to the bank every other Thursday and a
> >couple engineers would thrust their paycheques at me and ask me to
> >deposit them (same bank). *They'd simply write "for deposit only" on the
> >back with the account number. *Done. *I'd bring back the deposit
> >receipts. *Sometimes I'd ask one of them to do the same for me.
>
> >Don't need to see a balance. *Just a receipt for the deposited amount is
> >fine.
>
> >> A few years ago my wife opened a new account at a bank near her
> >> office. *She doesn't like to carry cash around, and wanted a nearby
> >> bank (our main bank is not nearby) in order to withdraw cash when
> >> needed. *A couple of weeks later I went by that bank and tried to
> >> deposit $100 in cash in her account.
>
> >> I have a driver's license with the same address, I know her social
> >> security number, and I had a check with me showing we had a joint
> >> account at another bank. *No good.
> >> She had to come with me to the bank to fill out a form adding me to
> >> the account.
>
> >Strange these banks. *They should keep money in but not keep it out.
>
> >I can _almost_ understand not depositing a personal cheque as it could
> >screw up a persons account and cost fees if it bounced.
>
> There is a certain logic to it. *Your account is personal. *If money
> ended up in your account that you didn't put there, and something
> later came up where a crime or bribery was charged, you'd be in a
> vulnerable position. *Conversely, any prosecutor would want to be able
> to say if deposits were made you must have made them. *If an IRS audit
> shows you have a great deal of money in the bank, they don't want you
> claiming you had no knowledge of the deposits.
>
> I know that's a long shot, but banks have to have black and white
> rules. *Something is allowed or it isn't. *It's easier for the banks
> to make the "it isn't" rule. *

When I pay money into a bank over the countere I always have to fill
in a slip
that has boxes for account codes and the person paying in the money,
although I've never been sure
what name(s) to put in that box.

>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 7/20/2011 8:14 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<200720110331438824%>,
> d says...
>>
>> In article< >, tony cooper
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>>>> You would not be allowed to deposit anything in a person's account at
>>>>> my bank if you are not on the account. Not cash, not a certified
>>>>> gov't check, not anything.
>>>>
>>>> get a different bank.
>>>>
>>>> all banks allow deposits to an account with properly endorsed checks.
>>>
>>> Interesting the way you say "all banks allow" when I have had just the
>>> opposite experience.
>>
>> your bank is the oddball.
>
> I don't recall ever being asked for ID when depositing money. All they
> ever wanted was a properly filled out deposit slip. I can't see any
> reason why one would need an ID to make a deposit.
>
>>>> businesses do it all the time. do you think the lowly secretary who
>>>> goes to the bank with a stack of checks is listed on the corporate
>>>> account? the checks are deposited and that's that.
>>>
>>> That's a business account. This is about a personal account. Alan
>>> was referring to a personal account.
>>
>> it's *any* account.
>>
>>>> or just use a smartphone to make a deposit. why even bother going to a
>>>> bank at all.
>>>
>>> A check can be mailed in, and the sender is then assumed to be the
>>> account holder.
>>
>> that's true but it's much easier and significantly faster with a phone.
>
> How do you deposit cash or a check with a smartphone? Have I missed
> some kind of new technology?
>
>

Cash no. Checks get scanned by an app on the phone.

--
Peter

On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 08:14:36 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<> wrote:

>In article <200720110331438824%>,
> says...
>>
>> In article <>, tony cooper
>> <> wrote:
>>
>> > >> You would not be allowed to deposit anything in a person's account at
>> > >> my bank if you are not on the account. Not cash, not a certified
>> > >> gov't check, not anything.
>> > >
>> > >get a different bank.
>> > >
>> > >all banks allow deposits to an account with properly endorsed checks.
>> >
>> > Interesting the way you say "all banks allow" when I have had just the
>> > opposite experience.
>>
>> your bank is the oddball.
>
>I don't recall ever being asked for ID when depositing money. All they
>ever wanted was a properly filled out deposit slip. I can't see any
>reason why one would need an ID to make a deposit.

I didn't say an ID is required to deposit money in either of my two
banks. One of my banks is now asking for the last four numbers of my
social security number if they do not have a photo ID on file. I
don't know why this new rule emerged.

One of my banks has a rule that a person must be on the account to
make a deposit to the account. I found this out when I tried to make
a deposit to an account my wife had opened. I wasn't "caught" because
I failed to have proper ID. They apparently guessed that I wasn't a
"Kathleen".

Not that it matters, but neither of my two banks require a deposit
slip when you go inside. If you put the account number on the
endorsement side, no form is necessary. I don't use the
drive-through, so I don't know about that.




--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 03:31:43 -0400, nospam <>
wrote:

>In article <>, tony cooper
><> wrote:
>
>> >> You would not be allowed to deposit anything in a person's account at
>> >> my bank if you are not on the account. Not cash, not a certified
>> >> gov't check, not anything.
>> >
>> >get a different bank.
>> >
>> >all banks allow deposits to an account with properly endorsed checks.
>>
>> Interesting the way you say "all banks allow" when I have had just the
>> opposite experience.
>
>your bank is the oddball.

How did you conduct this particular survey? I spoke of one bank where
I had personal experience. You are making claims about all banks.
Where do you get your information?

When you are in airports, do you stop at branch bank offices and ask
them about their deposit restrictions? Just how early do you arrive
for your flights? You seem to have a lot to do in airports.

>> That's a business account. This is about a personal account. Alan
>> was referring to a personal account.
>
>it's *any* account.

Alan is in Canada, and Canada may have different banking laws. In the
US, personal accounts and business accounts have different rules. I
have had both personal and business accounts.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:06:45 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>Using the Bank's mobile app, you log in to your account, select deposit
>check, and then take a photograph of the face & back of the check. The
>app will read the amount on the check and ask for confirmation that is
>has read the correct figure and then complete the deposit.
>This is exactly the same way the deposit would be made at a Bank specific ATM.

Just out of curiosity, what happens to the check? As you describe
above, the actual check is not given to the bank and the person
cashing it retains it.

Unless the phone has some capability of imprinting something on the
check, the holder of the check would seemingly be free to take that
check to another bank where he has an account and deposit the check in
that bank. It would eventually come to light, but it would cause a
problem for the payee and the second bank.

Depositing the check at an ATM gobbles up the check, so it is not
exactly the same. I think it does, anyway. I don't use ATMs.

There must be a safeguard in the system you describe, but I can't see
what it is.

Also, some businesses require their bank to return canceled checks to
them. They do not accept just photocopied access. Using the system
you describe above, this would not be possible. The system would
either have to reject deposits of checks from this company or somehow
require the depositor to bring in the check. That doesn't sound
practical.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Jul 19, 8:25*pm, Allen <all...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> On 7/19/2011 6:07 PM, tony cooper wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:46:56 -0400, Alan Browne
> > <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca> *wrote:
>
> >> On 2011-07-19 14:19 , tony cooper wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:56:06 -0400, Bowser<yeeec...@bleah.ugh> * wrote:
>
> >>>> OK, my turn. I was on Martha's Vineyard (MA, USA) for a bit, and while
> >>>> there I stopped to shoot a picture of the ferry terminal building inOak
> >>>> Bluffs. While shooting the picture, an employee of the Steamship
> >>>> Authority, the company who has a lock on transportation to and from the
> >>>> island, ask "sir, what are you doing?" I replied that I was taking a
> >>>> picture. She told me that "Homeland Security says that's illegal. Please
> >>>> don't take pictures of the building." I replied, politely, that it
> >>>> wasn't illegal and there are no laws against taking pictures of
> >>>> anything. I asked her to quote me the name and number of the law I was
> >>>> breaking. She said that her supervisor told her that this was illegal,
> >>>> so I had to stop. I said nonsense. She and her supervisor are dead
> >>>> wrong, and that she had no right to tell me what I can, or can't shoot,
> >>>> especially since I was standing on a public crosswalk. She called a cop
> >>>> over, who pretty much verified everything I told her. She asked for my
> >>>> name, address, everything, but I refused. The cop sided with me. Nowshe
> >>>> was ****ed. She summoned someone from inside the building, he came out,
> >>>> they talked for a second, and they hustled her inside where she couldn't
> >>>> bother anyone else. The cop just shook his head, the SSA employee
> >>>> apologized, I told them "no problem" and we all went our separate ways.
>
> >>>> I'm guessing she was just a moron. I've been riding that ferry for 30
> >>>> years, and have shot all manner of pictures on and off the boats, and
> >>>> not once have I ever been approached or told I can't shoot pictures.
> >>>> People shoot pictures on and around the ships all the time. I can't
> >>>> figure out why she singled me out.
>
> >>> Moron, though? *She was sent out by her supervisor who told her it was
> >>> illegal. *If anyone's the moron, the supervisor is. *No balls, either,
> >>> since he or she wouldn't come out.
>
> >> No evidence a supervisor actually said that to her - just her version of
> >> events.
>
> > If she fooled Bowser, then Bowser fooled me. *I can only respond to
> > what the person telling the story says the story was.
>
> >> (Used it today in fact - but lost. *On erands I went to a branch of my
> >> SO's bank to deposit a cheque she had received into her account. *I even
> >> knew the acct number (from the back of a previous cheque, in hand).
> >> They refused to deposit anything other than a bank draft/money order,
> >> certified cheque government cheque - unless I too had an account with
> >> that bank. *Didn't. *So ended up wasting time. *[ I have no trouble
> >> depositing cheques into my son's account and I don't have an account
> >> with them ]. *They say they changed policy a couple years ago).
>
> >> Just glad I see fewer and fewer cheques.
>
> > You would not be allowed to deposit anything in a person's account at
> > my bank if you are not on the account. *Not cash, not a certified
> > gov't check, not anything.
>
> > That doesn't mean you can't. *It just means you are not allowed to.
> > If you walk up with a deposit slip and a check in hand, the teller may
> > not notice you are not the account holder.
>
> > A few years ago my wife opened a new account at a bank near her
> > office. *She doesn't like to carry cash around, and wanted a nearby
> > bank (our main bank is not nearby) in order to withdraw cash when
> > needed. *A couple of weeks later I went by that bank and tried to
> > deposit $100 in cash in her account.
>
> > I have a driver's license with the same address, I know her social
> > security number, and I had a check with me showing we had a joint
> > account at another bank. *No good.
>
> > She had to come with me to the bank to fill out a form adding me to
> > the account.
>
> I'm surprised that there is a bank left in the US whose tellers know the
> customers. I was a banker and I started as a teller--normal in those
> days for people who expect to move up. Instead of the two or three hours
> of training new tellers receive now, my bank spent six weeks (yes, six
> weeks!). The last two weeks I spent with the oldest, most experienced
> teller, who identified every customer who walked in the door, with
> comments like "good as gold", "watch out for him", "lots of money but a
> short fuse", etc. Now its pretty much the Baskin & Robbins "take a
> number" approach, or even less personal. I can guarantee that after a
> year tellers back then knew more about banking than the MBAs that
> populate the desks do now.
> Allen

I deal with 3 different banks and most of the tellers know me by name,
and my wife, too. I think it is because I am one of the few people
who actually bother to walk into a bank these days. I'm amazed at how
uncrowded banks are lately. I guess most people do these things
online.

I've never had a problem depositing a check into someone else's
account. Maybe that opened up a potential scam, but hard to imagine
what it would be.

In article < ocal>, J.
Clarke <> wrote:

> > > >> You would not be allowed to deposit anything in a person's account at
> > > >> my bank if you are not on the account. Not cash, not a certified
> > > >> gov't check, not anything.
> > > >
> > > >get a different bank.
> > > >
> > > >all banks allow deposits to an account with properly endorsed checks.
> > >
> > > Interesting the way you say "all banks allow" when I have had just the
> > > opposite experience.
> >
> > your bank is the oddball.
>
> I don't recall ever being asked for ID when depositing money. All they
> ever wanted was a properly filled out deposit slip. I can't see any
> reason why one would need an ID to make a deposit.

exactly. banks will gladly take money. if it goes into the wrong
account, it will get sorted out eventually.

> > > >or just use a smartphone to make a deposit. why even bother going to a
> > > >bank at all.
> > >
> > > A check can be mailed in, and the sender is then assumed to be the
> > > account holder.
> >
> > that's true but it's much easier and significantly faster with a phone.
>
> How do you deposit cash or a check with a smartphone? Have I missed
> some kind of new technology?

take a photo of it. it's *very* convenient. the check clears the next
day.

In article <>, tony cooper
<> wrote:

> >Using the Bank's mobile app, you log in to your account, select deposit
> >check, and then take a photograph of the face & back of the check. The
> >app will read the amount on the check and ask for confirmation that is
> >has read the correct figure and then complete the deposit.
> >This is exactly the same way the deposit would be made at a Bank specific
> >ATM.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what happens to the check? As you describe
> above, the actual check is not given to the bank and the person
> cashing it retains it.

usually, the person keeps it for a couple of days to make sure the
deposit was properly processed (which is normally the next day) and
then destroys it.

> Unless the phone has some capability of imprinting something on the
> check, the holder of the check would seemingly be free to take that
> check to another bank where he has an account and deposit the check in
> that bank. It would eventually come to light, but it would cause a
> problem for the payee and the second bank.

part of the agreement is that you won't do that. if you try, you are
going to have an awful lot of explaining to do.

> Depositing the check at an ATM gobbles up the check, so it is not
> exactly the same. I think it does, anyway. I don't use ATMs.
>
> There must be a safeguard in the system you describe, but I can't see
> what it is.

it's trivial to see if a check is deposited more than once. they *do*
have a photo of it, you know, along with the routing #, account #,
check # and amount.

> Also, some businesses require their bank to return canceled checks to
> them. They do not accept just photocopied access. Using the system
> you describe above, this would not be possible. The system would
> either have to reject deposits of checks from this company or somehow
> require the depositor to bring in the check. That doesn't sound
> practical.

there is no such requirement.

canceled checks can be a 'substitute', often a scan of both sides but
in this case, it's photos of the original check from a phone.