|
There is no risk of the check being bad.
The check is being cashed at the bank upon which it is drawn.
The bank can check whether or not it is good (and it is good) right then and there.
In a general case, though, there is no reason for me to underwrite the risk associated w/ bad checks. Or, if the bank wishes me to underwrite this risk, I can do so at the terms I discussed above ($2,000 up-front processing fee, and 15,000% compounded continously on the face value of the check while we're waiting for the bank's check to clear). Making sure the check clears is the bank's responsibility, not mine. Do you know why? b/c if it were up to me, I would do it the plain and simple way: I'd call up the issuing bank on the which the check is drawn, do a quick funds verification, and decide right then and there whether or not the check can be paid.
I'd have the whole thing done and settled in 5 minutes.
Just think how much $$ I'd save the bank in interest alone, doing it my way(!) (per the terms I specified above).
But that's not how the bank does it.
Instead, the bank insists on doing their way.. their own, cumbersome, error-prone, 3-4 day long verification/check clearing procedure, and -- amazingly -- these criminals are asking me to underwrite the risk associated w/ this process(!)
Blasphemy!
I do not assume responsibility for things over which I have no control.
This is a basic, absolutely basic law of responsibility, and it's not one that I'm going to violate at the behest of some common knave such as yourself, who can do no better than resort to petty insults when legal arguments fail you.
What the banks are doing is something akin to this: there's a plane crash, but instead of the airline company (or FAA) getting sued for negligence, it's the (surviving) passengers on the plane who are sued(!!), and or their surviving family members! Why? b/c obviously it was THEIR fault that the plane crashed, no?? Because banking is shrouded in a layer of mystery, people don't realize that the scam the banks are running on them is just this simple, and just this outrageous. Yet the scam becomes evident if people just stop for a moment and think about it.
Hell, it's great work if you can find it.
Getting back on point, so far as the bank is concerned, it's only responsibility is to see that I get paid, regardless of the cost to the bank. If the check is bad, that's a problem between the bank and the person who wrote the check, not a problem between me and that person.
If this is such a problem for banks (and I don't think it is; the problem for banks is the toxic sludge they've built up for themselves in the derivatives market), then maybe banks should stop issuing flimsy commercial paper??
Biblically, we're not even really supposed to be using paper money/checks anyway: Even shlemah vatsedek yiheyeh-lach eyfah shlemah vatsedek yiheyeh-lach (But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have) (Deut 25:15) To the extent that we do use commerical paper, it should take the form of cheques (i.e., pre-paid financial instruments like cashier's cheques, traveler's cheques, postal money orders, warehouse receipts, etc) rather than checks (i.e., post-paid financial instruments, which carry a non-zero risk of non-payment and over which we are currently arguing).
The former is a much more responsible manner of payment than the later.
|