If a mobile deposit from a bank customer is deposited and the check was properly endorsed (for deposit only including bank name) and then the same check is deposited at another bank, which bank is liable for the item -the bank that accepted the imaged item or the bank that took the paper doc (deposit)? While the other bank had the check last, we have been told that it is the responsibility of the bank that accepted the mobile deposit since the check was not destroyed after the item was processed through mobile deposit. So my question is: which bank is liable?

Currently, the issue is a bit fuzzy, and banks that have received the actual check in a "second helping" -- by mistake or design -- have tales of having to eat those checks when they come back if unable to charge them back. The Fed has proposed that the bank that introduce added risk into the system (the banks accepting RDC or Mobile RDC) should absorb the risk, and one of the changes it would make to Reg CC (still a proposal) is to make the bank taking an RDC image for deposit and not receiving it back unpaid indemnify the bank that takes the same check in paper form, if the bank taking the paper check gets it returned unpaid.

THIS IS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE FED ADJUSTMENT WEBSITE:

December 13, 2013 (updated February 7, 2014)
In March 2013, the Federal Reserve Banks began announcing changes to the case submission requirements for the Paid Item T(PAID) investigation type (ITYP). The October 15, 2013 issue of FedFlash outlines in detail the changes to the PAID ITYP that were implemented on September 30, 2013. To better assist customers following the implementation, we would like to provide information on how the changes are applicable to the process of submitting an adjustments request for a PAID ITYP. As you may know, the Receiving Institution can report either the first or the second item charged as PAID, as long as the item being reported PAID was received in a cash/return letter from a Federal Reserve Bank (FRB).

We have recently started reviewing the PAID cases and if the item was done via mobile deposit and then cashed through a check cashing agency, we opt to go after the mobile deposit (as long as both items cleared within a reasonable length of time from each other. If one item cleared much earlier than the 2nd item, we would request credit from the 2nd item depositing institution. By always going for the mobile deposit (or attempting to), we are also alerting that bank that their customer is abusing the service. At our bank we turn them off after the first duplicate item offsense.

Interestingly, madukes, that's supportive of the FRB's latest Reg CC proposal, which would provide an indemnification by the RDC channel depositary in favor of the paper item depositary if the same item is deposited and it's charged back unpaid to the paper item depositary, resulting in a loss to that bank. Since the RDC channel depositary created the added risk that the item could be presented twice, it should take some of that risk, says the Fed.

I agree with that thinking.