Checks for use with quicken?

I have used CheckMagic for years. It adds a step but gives more flexibility and their supplies are more reasonably priced. You can also get blank check stock from local office supply stores.

Hey Hank, thanks for that link. I have a few follow-up questions.

1. Obviously is the issue with this being "normal" ink printers. I only have an inkjet and I don't think we'd want to burden a fledgling new scout unit with the cost of printers and stuff. So will a small credit union be able to process these checks or will they bounce it back on us or charge us more to process them or ...?
2. Is there possibly a security/auditability issue with printing checks on blank stock? With regular checks, at least the checks are pre-printed and numbered, so it is possible to see all the check counterfoils in sequence in the ledger/checkbook. I don't really know enough about this aspect myself, the next training session for treasurers aren't until July 9th, so I might have to wait until then, but we have a few expenses coming up and I may have to do something sooner rather than later.

There is a lot of discussion about the non-magnetic ink printed checks on the net. I use a standard inkjet printer and personally, I have never had a check rejected or been charged a fee. I don't write many checks these days but the few that I do write have been accepted with no problem.

Pre-printed and numbered checks can be stolen and used. I think blank stock is safer. CHECKMAGIC prints a stub with each wallet check that can be retained for hardcopy records. Business checks also print some sort of copy but I have never used business checks so I can't tell you any more than what is available from the CHECKMAGIC site. Basically, security and auditability issues are decisions for the individual user.

I used Quicken checks for the first few hundred when I started printing from Quicken (1992?) and then used checks from cheaper vendors for the next few hundred. There are many vendors that are cheaper than Quicken. I have never regretted changing to CHECKMAGIC.

Checks, at least the coding at the bottom, HAVE to be printed with magnetic ink so that the codes can be read by the scanners. Checks are so 19th century--get with the times, eh?

What would be "with the times" for reimbursing troop leaders for expenses and for paying for scouting events? Bear in mind it has to be simple, cheap and auditable. Each payment has to have two signatories or approvers. I can't do that electronically.

Ah, actually, they don't have to. Most banks now use optical scanners and can handle regular ink-printed checks just as well as magnetic ink. The worse that happens is that checks have to be manually 'fixed' (a small paper strip is added to the bottom of the check) if the scanners can't read it. It is true that a fee might be incurred if this happens. This system is in place even for magnetic ink checks that can't be read.

Check out a couple of web sites:

and (Especially the question "What about MICR?"). (I used Checkmagic for a couple of years personally and had a few checks get 'fixed' but never had a fee charged.)

Heck, my credit union lets me scan my checks at home and upload images for deposit.

My sister runs an accounting service from her home and has one printer with an MICR cartridge for printing scanable checks, but those things are REALLY expensive.

Thanks for that information, Andrew. Up here in Canada, even though most financial institutions can and do manually "fix" checks for processing, it is not guaranteed. Some cheques, as we call them up here, DO get rejected for that reason. Also, the Canada Revenue Agency is adamant that certain payment stubs, with individualized data that they send out MUST be used and can't be copied by an ordinary photocopier for re-use, as they lack the magnetic ink. It should be no surprise that Canada Revenue is behind the times by their insistence, in some cases, of MICR, with no manual processing if one contravenes their usage requirement.

Bert, as an OP pointed out, many financial institutions WILL still manually process checks lacking MICR. However, I wouldn't rely on it always happening.

And things have evolved even further. Many banks use ATMs that scan the entire check or allow their customers to scan and deposit checks from home. The MICR line and check amount is OCR'd to get the details. Per the Check 21 rules, the check no longer needs to be presented as a scanned image is sufficient.

With all due respect, and I realize that none here may know exactly, but how does this pertain to the situation I described? The Scout Unit bank account is not an individual account, it is probably more on the lines of a business account with multiple signatories for checks and a fair number or transactions involving cash deposits, etc.

The credit union that does this is essentially doing a community service by not charging the many Scout accounts that they handle any fees. I don't want to get to the position where I've spent money buying checks and software and then find that the CU either refuses to process checks we wrote or starts charging the unit a handling fee when I could have avoided this by simply sticking with handwriting the checks.

I really would prefer to print the checks from Quicken, but I'm in unfamiliar territory here.

You are correct and I understand that. I was merely using that to point out that an account for a Scout Unit is somewhat different than a regular consumer account - as is using Quicken to keep the books. :)

I can always switch to using pre-printed checks at a later stage, so I guess for now I'll simply order the $11 for 50 checks from the bank. Although they gave me this brochure full of expensive check options. :(

That sounds great! Even though almost all my receipts are EFT, I wish my bank (BA) would let me do that for the occasional check I get.

It's also much more trouble (with most printers) to have to insert the blank checks into the printer every time you want to print a check (unless you have a second printer that you use only for checks). So I greatly prefer to use Quicken to have my bank send electronic payments (or checks to individuals and small companies) rather than create any checks myself.

There are a few situations where I need to write checks, but my total number of checks is very low, and I get them from my bank at no charge, so I wouldn't want to pay for Quicken checks or buy a second printer just for checks.

The same is true of using Quicken to make EFT payments through your bank.

Hi, Mike.

There are at least two people that you should talk with about this.

First, discuss this with your banker, the person at the credit union that handles your Scout Unit account. You say the credit union handles "many Scout accounts". So your question, while it may be new to you, is surely not new to the banker. Find out what other Scout Units are doing, and whether the banker would prefer that your unit handle things in a different way.

Second, discuss this with your counterparts or predecessors at other Scout Units. Your first post said this is a "new scout unit" and that seems to mean that you are the first person to have this job; otherwise, I would suggest that you talk with your direct predecessor. But even if you are the first person to hold the job for your unit - especially if you are the first! - you do not need to re-invent the wheel. All the questions that you have and the challenges that you will face have been asked, answered and faced by others. Talk to them!

Another topic that you didn't raise (directly), but is always at the front of my mind as a retired CPA: Are you sure that Quicken is the right tool for this job? And I don't mean just the mechanical printing of the checks. Your second post in this thread asked:

As I've expounded here from my soapbox several times, Quicken is a completely insecure and un-auditable computer program. Any entry can be changed or erased at any time without a trace. :>( It is fine for me to use in keeping my own books, what I call "first-party accounting", because I trust myself to be honest with myself. Quicken can also work for "second-party accounting", such as keeping books for other family members who don't have much choice but to trust my honesty and ability.

But for third-party accounting - which is what you will be doing - Quicken must be accompanied by other "internal controls" to assure troop members, leaders, donors and others that what is recorded and reported accurately reflects what has happened. Such controls as pre-numbered checks and receipts, and tickets for fund-raising events, are essential, and multiple signatures on checks are often required. While I've never been involved in accounting or bookkeeping for a Boy Scout troop, I'm sure that Boy Scouts of America must have plenty of guidance for troop treasurers and other scout officials. You should learn a lot at your July 9th training session.

Sadly, we read too often about non-profit organization officials who have not properly handled the organization's funds. When charges are made, the official needs to be able to present clear evidence of what did or did not happen to all the money collected and spent. In my retired - but experienced - professional opinion, Quicken is poorly equipped to handle that responsibility. It must be surrounded with other controls adequate for the protection of the organization AND of the treasurer and other officials.

As I said at the beginning, be sure you discuss all this with the banker and with other scout officials before you make your decisions about handling the Scout Unit's funds and records.

RC

-- R. C. White, CPA San Marcos, TX (Retired. No longer licensed to practice public accounting.) snipped-for-privacy@grandecom.net Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010) (Using Quicken Deluxe 2011 R 8 and Windows Live Mail in Win7 x64)

Robert Neville wrote:

With all due respect, and I realize that none here may know exactly, but how does this pertain to the situation I described? The Scout Unit bank account is not an individual account, it is probably more on the lines of a business account with multiple signatories for checks and a fair number or transactions involving cash deposits, etc.

The credit union that does this is essentially doing a community service by not charging the many Scout accounts that they handle any fees. I don't want to get to the position where I've spent money buying checks and software and then find that the CU either refuses to process checks we wrote or starts charging the unit a handling fee when I could have avoided this by simply sticking with handwriting the checks.

I really would prefer to print the checks from Quicken, but I'm in unfamiliar territory here.

I use MICR cartridges and they're not all that expensive, the trick is to research the cost of MICR cartridges and MICR refills before chosing a printer. I use an elderly HP LaserJet 6L, readily available from swapmeets, ebay, etc. as are any repair parts needed (once the feed rollers are replaced with the newer ones there's little or no repairs needed) and toner cartridges are inexpensive and refillable. I use a much faster color laser for all other printing, the 6L is for checks only and MICR cartridges last for years with the little use I give it......

Welcome to Usenet - conversations tend to evolve beyong the original question. :) That said check processing isn't conditional on the type of account. The fact that the account is located at a particular institution isn't necessarily germain either, as the check you write could be deposited in any otehr financial institution and must confirm to the system rules, not your particular institution's rules.

So you need to be having this conversation with your CU as the fees they may or may not charge for processing checks that have had manual encoding by the receeiving institution are up to them.