"Check 21" Act

[juststartingout]

Before reading - my first question at the back of my mind is... isn't a scanned and/or copied signature considered a forgery on a document?



To read more on this topic goto this link and follow the links at the bottom of the page. http://http://www.federalreserve.gov...on/default.htm



Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act

About | Frequently Asked Questions





The Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (Check 21) was signed into law on October 28, 2003, and will become effective on October 28, 2004. Check 21 is designed to foster innovation in the payments system and to enhance its efficiency by reducing some of the legal impediments to check truncation. The law facilitates check truncation by creating a new negotiable instrument called a substitute check, which would permit banks to truncate original checks, to process check information electronically, and to deliver substitute checks to banks that want to continue receiving paper checks. A substitute check would be the legal equivalent of the original check and would include all the information contained on the original check. The law does not require banks to accept checks in electronic form nor does it require banks to use the new authority granted by the act to create substitute checks.



The Federal Reserve Board has released the final rule to implement Check 21, including the model disclosure language for depository institutions to use in notifying consumers of their rights under the law.

[juststartingout]

also -note that the original check will most likely be destroyed -as is the case with US Bank (it is up to the individual bank's discretion)

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue face=verdana>I beleive its only considered a "forgery" if it is used as if it was the original in some sort of transaction.



In criminal law, "intent" is a very important part of the charge.



-BT[/color]

[juststartingout]

From that website it states:



A substitute check is legally the same as the original check if it accurately represents the information on the original check and includes the following statement: “This is a legal copy of your check. You can use it the same way you would use the original check.” The substitute check must also have been handled by a bank.



The check that I write will be deposited at a bank, and then scanned in, trashed and they will present the bank that pays on the check with the scanned image. That is the transaction that takes place. This is where I was thinking some type of fraud was occuring. But, if I was wrong thinking that, I stand corrected

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue face=verdana>Understood.



However, once you give the check to your bank as a deposit, you are transferring the right to collect from you to that bank. You are effectively "out of the loop". From that point the only parties to the inherant contract that the instrument carries is the drawee and drawer and if they don't have a problem communicating with facsimiles, i don't think there would be an opportunity for interference.



Just my opinion.



-BT[/color]

[seeker]

And how many times have you had to resort to a cancelled check to prove you have honored a commitment?

[TheBlackTruth]

<font color=darkblue FACE=VERDANA>Well, to be technical. .. .using what we know about "tender", we know that you actually honored your committment the MOMENT you submitted the check as payment to the payee. The "cancelled check" is really more directly evidence that shows that the DRAWEE honored its commitment to the DRAWER.



-BT[/color]