Just curious - how many of you cash "on us" checks for non customers?

Thanks, Lisa

We do - and don't charge. While I know a lot of banks don't, I honestly don't see how a bank can't do that since our customer requested it with the item. Of course we would ID the individual at the teller window.

Onus meaning it's drawn off of the account of one of your customers? I'm not sure if that's what you're getting at, but we're all required to honor those checks (assuming we can identify the person, account in good standing, etc etc), and most of us will only cash them for a non-customer (vs allowing them to purchase a cashier's check for instance).

If you mean something else, I'm not sure. Checks from non-customers drawn off their own accounts elsewhere?

Cash 'em.

Again, subject to the usual...if available funds and the holder of the check has an ID.....

What movie/tv show is that where the character calls a check a "note to give my bank so you can have some of my money?" Gotta google that later!

We do without a fee for now.
Does anyone cash them, but with a limit?

From OCC FAQs:
Answers about Cashing Checks

I went to a bank to cash a check that was drawn on the bank. I do not have an account with the bank and they refused to cash the check. Can it do this?
Yes. There is no federal law or regulation that requires national banks to cash checks for noncustomers. Most banks have policies that allow check cashing services only for customers who have an account with them in order to protect both themselves and their customers from forgeries.

The OCC minces a couple words on that one. No, there is no federal law that requires your bank to cash an on-us check on behalf of a non customer.

However, state law can quite easily be read to say that you have a contract with the drawer to pay according to his written order. The payee, not a party to the contract, can only whine at you. The drawer can do more...

I have searched and searched and have not come up with one case that was won by a non-customer (or customer) for wrongful dishonor of a check cash over the counter. It appears that the banks have until midnight to pay (or return) before dishonor come in to play from several cases that I have read. Some of the cases that I have read where the banks have won seem to also be riddled with errors other errors (on the judges part) so it makes it difficult to prove ones point either way.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court-appellate-division/1118042.html

That's an incredible research project. Even though most states have adopted the same version of the UCC, an on point court decision in one state would not set a precedent for any other state. The decision you linked is a good example, I noted the first time it was linked here that it clearly indicates the payee (the plaintiff here) does have standing to assert a claim of wrongful dishonor. I imagine that's a pretty unique perspective, probably explained in some prior case based on the law of New York. My guess is that it's the minority view. As it's pure dicta in this case, there's no citation.

There isn't any suggestion that the drawer's only recourse against the drawee bank is in the courts. Some customers can very effectively extract recourse in face to face conversations with bank personnel.

I agree with you on the does, hence my riddled with errors comment.

Although we disagree with Citibank's argument that plaintiff cannot sue for wrongful dishonor because she was not the drawer of the check, the cause of action for wrongful dishonor should have been dismissed nonetheless since the check was not dishonored.   Under Uniform Commercial Code § 4-402, “[a] payor bank is liable to its customer for damages proximately caused by the wrongful dishonor of an item.”  “Customer” is defined as “any person having an account with a bank or for whom a bank has agreed to collect items” - See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court-appellate-division/1118042.html#sthash.twCSk95z.dpuf

The plaintiff opened an account would that make them a customer? I would think so.

I would have thought that there would be cases upon cases with each sided claiming victory in addition to some regulator with a comment.

We cash on us items but ID the person making the request. If it is a large amount we will sometimes call our customer to verify. Each case it by the tellers best judgement (with training of course).

I do recall that particular NY case, and the finding depended on the fact that the payee happened also to be a customer of the drawee bank. I have a problem with that sort of reasoning when it's applied by a single court in the one state that hasn't yet adopted even the 1990 updates to the UCC. Any reasonable reading of "liable to its customer" would indicate the customer in question is the depositor that issued the check because it depends upon the contractual agreement between the issuing depositor and the bank that the bank will pay items that are properly payable from the customer's account.

New York can be, let's say, "unique" when it comes to many things!

one would think that this would have been hashed out by now. Or at least some CMP against someone.

We do and charge a $7.50 fee.

We do to - $10.00 fee

We charge a $15.00 fee if check is over $500.
Free if under $500, free for non-customers cashing an On-Us payroll check from one of our Business customers.

We do, with no fee.

We do, no fee and with valid identification as defined in our procedures.

Yes, we do without charging a fee.

We cash them, no fee. Just verify the person and that there are enough funds to cover check.

We charge a fee. We have taken losses with fake ID's/fake checks, and that's how we justify our fee.