If a bank receives a stop payment order on a stolen check, can the bank charge a fee for the stop payment.
I understand that if the customer had "several checks" stolen, the bank can not charge a fee for each check in a pack of stolen checks, but can the bank charge a fee for 1 stolen check which it has knowledge was stolen?

We close the account. Any stop payments are placed as an internal control on the account at no charge to the customer.

For a check the customer has knowledge was stolen, then yes, we suggest to close the account.

However, I do think we charge to place a stop payment for even stolen checks. If they lost a booklet, we just note the range of checks, but it is only one fee, not a fee for each.

We close the account if the checks were lost or stolen. If the customer says, "I need to place a stop payment on checks 531-560 because that pad is missing", we close the account.

Counterfeiting and account takeovers are running way too rampant not to take missing checks seriously.

Your customer could make a pretty strong argument that (1) he's notified you that checks 576 - 600 are lost or stolen (2) you were put on notice that any checks in that range are suspect and should therefore not pay them and (3) how you prevent them from being paid is not the customer's responsibility.

The concept of a stop payment suggests that the check in question had originally been issued and authorized by your customer. When the checks in question were stolen or lost, and later used by someone else fraudulently, there is no customer authorization to be stopped.

Your customer may very well come up with something like those arguments to tell you he isn't planning on paying a stop payment fee.

If the checks are stolen who know what the person who stole the checks are up to. I have seen a check come in on an account that was held for 6 months, and after the stop payment expired.

Try to convince the customer to close the account and reopen.

We've had check fraud rings that would visit our area every 18 months, and have had stolen checks show up over 10 years after the fact. Things have gotten much more sophisticated. Now it's not so much stopping the checks that were stolen, it's what the perpretator does with the account information. Besides counterfiet checks, we've had unauthorized TEL and WEB ACH items come in.

I'm with Fraud Pup. Close on all lost/stolen accounts.

Yes, you can charge a fee. However, some banks do not if the customer has issued a replacement check. The point being that if the first check was stolen and it gets paid they know they would have had to fool with it and they are glad to be able to just return it "reported stolen." As noted "payment stopped" sends the wrong message to the presenting bank and its depositor:



If you believe the loss of a single, completed check tips the scales and compromises the account then many (including some of those above) would suggest you simply close the account.

Thanks for all replies. In this case they only lost 1 check. They have all the others. It was dropped. I understand how UCC does not want the bank to charge the customer multiple stop payment fees if lost or stolen a group of checks, but it is unclear if 1 check reported stolen is chargeable????

None of your respondents cited you to law or regulation; the model version of the UCC does not deal with stop payment fees. It's a policy issue. Mine would be not to charge if the customer provided the number for the replacement check.

I would not charge for 1 stoklen check, but I would require the account to be closed and open a new one.