Also, depends on how it is written...is it "Person X" and "Person Y" and "Person Z", or "Person X" or "Person Y" or "Person Z". If the latter, only one person needs to sign. If the former, all need to sign and depends on your bank.

fatbaby said:It's written "X, Y, and Z".Then all three need to endorse it. Any of you should be able to deposit it once it is endorsed. If you are worried, then deposit it in the ATM.

juliox said:do NOT deposit in the ATM unless you want to add a level of complexity to the whole thing - letters going to you to let you know why the check didn't clear or that they need something. just have everyone sign it, and take it into the bank and deposit itBull crap. Once everyone signs it, there is no difference between depositing in an ATM compared to a teller. In fact, a blank endorsed check (just names signed) legally becomes a bearer instrument, so letter of the law allows the person in physical possession of the check to cash it even if that person's name isn't on the check at all.

What did your bank say?

I just had to deal with this recently for a client.

if A and B are named, both A and B must endorse.

that being said, if only B signs, there is a 80% chance the check will get through and post.

but there is a 20% chance it will get kicked back... and you'll get hit with fees.

cashmonkey said:cheezedawg said:... so letter of the law allows the person in physical possession of the check to cash it even if that person's name isn't on the check at all.That seems like a great reason right there to deposit it in person. Otherwise it's almost like depositing cash into an ATM.

If a check is endorsed "For deposit only", it must be deposited into the account of the checks payee (can't be cashed). I'm not how that that works with multiple payees.

BTW: I DO deposit cash into the newer ATM's that don't use enevelopes. They even count the cash for you, along with "reading" the checks.

gifpaste said:cheezedawg said:juliox said:do NOT deposit in the ATM unless you want to add a level of complexity to the whole thing - letters going to you to let you know why the check didn't clear or that they need something. just have everyone sign it, and take it into the bank and deposit itBull crap. Once everyone signs it, there is no difference between depositing in an ATM compared to a teller. In fact, a blank endorsed check (just names signed) legally becomes a bearer instrument, so letter of the law allows the person in physical possession of the check to cash it even if that person's name isn't on the check at all.

/hijack

anyone know why that law exists?

seems silly that I have to write for deposit only on all of my checks to friends/family just in case someone else gets a hold of it

Once upon a time, checks were known as negotiable instruments. In an era of trust, reduced banking hours and before ATMs, you could negotiate your paycheck to your grocer by writing on the back "Pay to the order of Greg the Grocer, /s/ gifpaste". Then, the grocer could negotiate it to his supplier by writing "Pay to the order of Sam the Supplier, /s/ Greg the Grocer". Then the Supplier could so negotiate it to his wholesaler, etc. If the check bounces, EVERY PERSON who signed the check (front or back) is on the hook, for violating the drawer's or indorser's warranties. In a small town america scenario, this was seriously embarrassing, so people only wrote checks they could back up, and only accepted checks from people they trusted.

If you endorse in blank, it turns the check into a bearer instrument-- just like if the original drawer had written "Pay to the order of CASH" or "Pay to the order of BEARER". This is the default fallback, because back in the day no one endorsed their check in blank, they would always "Pay to the Order of 'someone else'". In the case that someone forgot and just signed it, it promoted the negotiability of instruments. There are other great rules that promote negotiability ("holder in due course" comes to mind) that no one really uses anymore, but they're in the law nonetheless.

When I got married, a lot of people wrote us checks made out to Mr. & Mrs. XX. We took them to my husband's bank and they wouldn't cash them, because they required me to sign and show ID. Since I didn't have an ID with my new name, they wouldn't take them. I had to get a new drivers license to cash the darn checks.

So, for future reference, if you are writing a check for a wedding, write it for Mr. OR Mrs. XX, or just out to one party. Makes it much easier.

dawndelion said:When I got married, a lot of people wrote us checks made out to Mr. & Mrs. XX. We took them to my husband's bank and they wouldn't cash them, because they required me to sign and show ID. Since I didn't have an ID with my new name, they wouldn't take them. I had to get a new drivers license to cash the darn checks.

So, for future reference, if you are writing a check for a wedding, write it for Mr. OR Mrs. XX, or just out to one party. Makes it much easier.

cho chweet...

But, have you thought that maybe those guests and the bank did you a favor? if you didn't get forced to get your new id, you would surely have run into bigger issues later on. Getting a new name and not getting a new id in your new name seems like a very bad idea to me.

Anakin