Husband brings in a check payable to Husband AND Wife with both endorsements and is deposited (no cash back) into their joint account.

A month later, Wife says Husband deposited the check without her signature. Husband admits he endorsed her name.

The Wife did receive benefit from the check because she was joint owner on the account. Several debit card transactions were made with her card after the deposit was made.

What is the Bank’s liability, if any, in this situation?

Tell them to sue you. They have no true recourse. Her claim is against her husband. She had amble access to the funds.

Just curious, the "check." Government or garden variety?

"If any?" is the correct question, I just want to consider the possibility that the wife could file her complaint with DOT in addition to filing one with you.

If she complains to someone and it results in the check being returned - you will still just charge it back and they both would be responsible for the amount of the check since it was deposited into the joint account. The Bank has no liability here.

hmmm...deposited into a joint account where both had access to funds...I don't see that you have liability here...but I do think that maybe the husband/wife are trying to game the system and think the bank will pay them to "make it right."

I think we're missing the rest of the story. What we don't know is whether wife actually got any of the funds she was entitled to. If husband deposited the check to the joint account and withdrew the funds before wife could access them (probably before she knew the check was deposited or even received), she could feel cheated and attempt to go after the bank when, as pointed out earlier, her complaint should be with her husband. They don't have to be trying to game the system. They may just have a soap opera going on and the bank looked like a convenient target.

Nonetheless, the bank isn't liable if the funds went into the joint account of the check's payees.

So, I was too subtle?

If it is a Treasury check and she complains to them there will be more involved than just telling her to take a hike.

OP here. Thanks for your responses. The check in question was from an insurance company, not a Treasury check.

What IF the check had been deposited into an account solely in the Husband's name?

Your original post indicated the wife had accessed the account with her debit card after the check was deposited. That was critical to the comments made in that they your respondents probably assumed it was a joint account. (I did.)

If he deposited a check payable to both of them in an account that was in his name only by forging her signature, then you are in trouble. If the insurance check required a personal endorsement by each payee (language on the back), then your situation is hopeless; the insurance company can return a draft well after the midnight deadline.

Example: Check payable to John and Randy. John signs the check in his own name, then forges Randy's signature and deposits the check into an account owned by John. Your bank paid over a forged endorsement. The presence or lack of a marital relationship between the payees simply has no bearing.

then your situation is hopeless. .

I would not go that far - you still go after the hubby.

Insurance checks can be sticky, especially if it was made payable to two parties and deposited into a sole owned account. Sounds like in addition to being possibly liable for the check (depending on the situation) you also have a training issue on how tellers are supposed to process items.

Yup. If the "second" scenario is your actual fact situation, make it plain that you will do exactly that. Be advised, it's possible that nothing could please her more.

Let's see if I have this correct now.

The insurance check was actually deposited into their joint account. The Bank has no liability to the Wife because she received benefit. Let the Husband and Wife dispute it between themselves.

IF the insurance check had been deposited into the Husband's sole account, the Bank would be liable to reimburse the Wife; however, Bank may seek recourse against the Husband due to forgery.

Does that appear to be an accurate summary?

Thank you all for being patient and helping me to understand.

Ken, regarding your comment that insurance companies can return drafts well after the midnight deadline - is that because they were payable through a 2nd party? To be honest I have not seen an insurance draft in quite a number of years - have only seen checks recently but I do know at one point they would be drawn on one bank/entity but payable through another.

Draft/check, there are no differences. Endorsement irregularities can come back for three years in most States.

Historically, insurance companies issued drafts that, pursuant to their terms and their agreement with what would normally be the drawee bank, were not subject to the midnight deadline. The insurance company had the right to return them after they received their statement.

thanks Ken!