[HN Gopher] His Life Savings Were Mailed to Him by Paper Check. ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       His Life Savings Were Mailed to Him by Paper Check. Now, It's Gone
        
       Author : littlexsparkee
       Score  : 13 points
       Date   : 2025-05-18 21:40 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
        
       | littlexsparkee wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/rh76h
        
       | ReptileMan wrote:
       | >In a court filing, it tried to wipe its hands of the matter,
       | claiming that it had no fiduciary responsibility to Mr. Handy and
       | that he had taken possession of the checks before the thief stole
       | them.
       | 
       | Doesn't looks as clear cut as the title makes it to be.
        
       | josephcsible wrote:
       | What's the point of having checks at all instead of just mailing
       | cash, if stolen checks can be fraudulently cashed with no
       | recourse?
        
         | jopsen wrote:
         | I don't understand checks, but isn't it just paper that allows
         | transfer of money to the person the check is addressed?
         | 
         | If so, what does it matter that someone else cashed it? Such
         | transaction is unauthorized, it's a matter between the bank and
         | the thief, and doesn't concern Mr. Handy.
         | 
         | What concerns Mr. Handy is Paychex refusing to honor the check.
         | Presumably they are claiming he authorized transfer of money to
         | a person that neither Paychex or Mr. Handy can identify.
         | 
         | Probably PayChex has a weak claim there :)
         | 
         | Again, I don't fully understand checks -- but my impression is
         | that because a check is (often) addressed to a person, they are
         | actually pretty safe. I'm assuming fraud is always the
         | responsibility of the bank that failed to verify addressed
         | person. Hence, why cashing a 100k check probably isn't easy to
         | do -- stealing to check is probably the easy part. Cashing it
         | without getting caught is the impressive part.
         | 
         | That said: In practice, I'd never want to use a check.
        
           | Saris wrote:
           | Yeah it should be the fault of the bank that didn't check
           | things before cashing it.
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | There are various attempts to phase checks out, and switch to
         | FedNow and RTP instant payment rails. Unfortunately, there is
         | no legislation requiring a deadline to phase out paper
         | instruments such as checks. Call your Congressional rep. The
         | infra already exists, anyone dragging their feet has limited
         | incentive to hurry up.
        
       | patricklorio wrote:
       | So he received the checks and mailed them to his bank but they
       | were intercepted in the second leg and cashed out. Sounds like
       | the fault is with the banks that cashed out the checks without
       | adequate verification.
        
         | theandrewbailey wrote:
         | But how will small mom and pop banks be able to afford shiny
         | towers downtown if they have to know every single customer? \s
        
       | fancyfredbot wrote:
       | How often is this happening? If criminals are aware that 401k
       | transfers are done using cheques in the post, and some of the
       | addresses these are typically sent to, then I'm expecting this to
       | be a very common type of fraud. Yet the practice of 401k cheques
       | in the mail continues? Weird.
        
       | shusaku wrote:
       | > Without knowing the type, nobody can tell the I.R.S. later on
       | what taxes to collect, if any, or tell the participant what he or
       | she may owe. And guess what. With paper checks, you can just put
       | words on them that help explain or signal what kind of account
       | the money came from and where it's supposed to end up.
       | 
       | Oh the irony.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-18 23:01 UTC)