Mom wrote check out to a photographer and gave check to son to get pictures taken. Son turns around and goes to a different bank and cashes the check. The son simply endorsed the check "pay to the order of...son's signature" No where has the business signed over this check to the mom's son. The mom is now wondering what we can do for her since she is out the money and no pictures. My gut instinct is that she need to go to where the son cashed the check and do an affadavit of alteration or something. From my search here, the UCC does give her 1 year to figure out this out and then 30 days to notify after finding the issue. Do we have to return the money to her if she fills out an affadavit of alteration with us, even though we didn't cash the check?

The check wasn't altered. The drawee bank had the right to return the check "not endorsed as drawn," but that would have had to be done by the midnight deadline.

The argument remaining is that the bank that cashed the check guaranteed the missing endorsement; i.e. that of the payee. The water is a bit murky on that point in light of the fact that the check was actually endorsed by someone else.

The claim against the bank that cashed the check can be made by either your customer or you, but it will be made outside the clearing system. The claim will reference 4-205(2) and be supported by an affidavit from the photographer that he or she did not get the proceeds.

It would be prudent to point out to the customer that the other bank may file charges against her son if they have to cough up the money...

Oops...point of clarification. The Photographer was never visited by the son. They did not take any pictures and are not out any money. At this point they have nothing to do with the transaction. It is really between the son and the mom.

Sorry, that was a bit of critical information that I omitted.

You still need the affidavit from the person the check is actually payable to, the photographer.

I would just suggest Mom take sonny behind the woodshed and teach him a lesson

If the check were made payable to the photographer "pay to the order of...son's signature" is not a proper endorsement. In Georgia, I believe that OCGA 11-4-208 would hold that the bank that cashed the item breached its presentment warranty, which is an except to the requirements set forth for the midnight deadline.

That is what Ken said above. Still the bank that cashed the check has the potential to go after the son both civilly and criminally.

The photography studio won't have any incentive to provide an affidavit because it isn't out any money since it provided no services. The only route available, I think, is a simple claim under 4-205.

Personally, I'd rather than Mom address the matter with her son.

Definitely would like this to stay between the mother and the son as it appears they have issues. Thank you all for you advice. Haven't heard from the mother since the 800th phone call from her yesterday morning

you probably won't, she wants the money back from the bank but doesn't want junior to get in trouble...she can't have her cake and eat it...