How pedantic are banks?

Peter,

If the check is actually from 1940 it will be rejected as a "stale" check. The bank teller should have no difficulty recognizing the check as quite old. If the date on the check is just an error then it's hard to say whether the teller will notice the problem. If the teller does, he should reject the check and advise you to get a new check. I'd gamble on the teller not noticing the date.

Shouldn't the teller realise it's a mistake and just accept it? I mean if the date was 6 months ago, it could be an old cheque, and the person who wrote it should not be expecting it to be cashed, but clearly this cheque is not a 1940s cheque, so it's a mistake. We'll see....

Probably not: A cheque is valid for as long as the debt between the two parties (i.e. issuer and payee) exists. In other words, cheques don?t have an expiration date. However, it is common banking practice to reject cheques that are over six months old to protect the payer, in case the payment has been made another way or the cheque may have been lost or stolen.

Given the circumstances described, an alert bank might take this as an indication of dementia and start scrutinising all the lady's transactions carefully.

Starting by rejecting this cheque, in case she didn't realise what she was doing when she wrote it.

If the cheque was for the sum of £20 15s 2p, the bank teller may notice.

But not if it was for £20 15s 2d presumably.

He certainly would since the sum would be £20 15s 2d !

In any case the chances are that the account against which the cheque was drawn no longer exists. When an account is closed, any cleared cheques are first honoured from it. Others are referred to drawer.

Cheques are not drawn against banks but the accounts of customers, They are instructions of a customer to his bank with regard to his account. The bank will carry them out only if it is in a position to do so.

I assume "discretionary" includes cheques which have quite obviously been dated wrongly. If the cheque was really from 1940, it would look very old and yellow or tattered, and be of a completely different design.

She does have dementia or something similar. She's not at all with it. That doesn't mean the bank should have any right to interfere, that's up to her relatives.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 08:46:41 -0000, Nightjar

I once found a cheque I had failed to pay in for nearly two years. I waited until just after it's second 'birthday' and paid it in with no trouble.

Robert

I think he meant the *2p* to be *2d*. The *d* being the old imperial money.

Peter

No. The teller should follow the bank's procedures if he wishes to remain employed. I'd still just present the check. There's a good chance the teller won't notice the date. Clearly, you did not.

Good luck, DaveM.

Also the amount to pay would be in Pounds, Shillings and Pence.

I once avoided a wheel clamp fee by writing last years date on the cheque. The bank spotted it and returned the cheque. The wheel clamper didn't have my address. Win, win.

Frank Turner-Smith

Banks have a duty of care only to accept instructions from people who have mental capacity. They are the first line of defence against fraud by carers and dodgy tradesmen.

It will probably fail in clearing and if you are unlucky lock down her account completely depending on how convincing her signature is compared to the one that the bank holds on file.

They have a duty of care to her and as such will be cautious.

You will find then that at some point her degraded signature or mistakes made on cheques will trigger a failure and they will then bounce any and all transactions until you register an LPA with them.

Even then after registering the LPA some banks can be complete bastards and demand a letter from the GP *in addition* to the formal LPA.