Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

post dated cheque


kathb00
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5086 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

i sent two cheques to cover a bill one was dated the 2nd january and the other was post dated the 9th january but i have checked my bank account this morning and both cheques have already been cashed. I always thiought a cheque cant be cashed before the date of issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if it was february, then 2 points. it is illegal to postdate a cheque although a lot of people do and the banks reserve the right to cash a postdated cheque unless of course it was January as blacksheep has stated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Are you sure its illegal to post date a cheque? A pd cheque is an acknowledgment that the payer agrees the debt is due and is therefore good thing to accept in payment, rather than just a promise to issue a cheque later. I issued a pd cheque once and subsequently stopped it as matters changed. In court I lost trying to argue why I stopped the cheque. The why was irrelevant, simply you cannot stop a post dated cheque.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure its illegal to post date a cheque? A pd cheque is an acknowledgment that the payer agrees the debt is due and is therefore good thing to accept in payment, rather than just a promise to issue a cheque later. I issued a pd cheque once and subsequently stopped it as matters changed. In court I lost trying to argue why I stopped the cheque. The why was irrelevant, simply you cannot stop a post dated cheque.

 

issuing of post dated cheque is not admission of debt.

 

However in banking terms there is no such thing as post dated since banks do not like customers issuing them. Years ago there were Bills of Exchange which was like issuing a post dated cheque and could not to banked before the due date, must admit haven't come across this lately

Link to post
Share on other sites

issuing of post dated cheque is not admission of debt.

 

 

I'm not sure the courts would agree with you on that one humbleman....

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On what basis does he say this? In what way can a cheque show anything but an intention to pay, and hence an admission of debt?

 

BTW, I'm not arguing HM, just debating :) I am curious, as if you are right, it goes against all my experiences in court!

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On what basis does he say this? In what way can a cheque show anything but an intention to pay, and hence an admission of debt?

 

BTW, I'm not arguing HM, just debating :) I am curious, as if you are right, it goes against all my experiences in court!

 

In the 90s it was quite common that you would issue suppliers a post dated cheque when you exceeded your credit limit, so the supplier would deliver goods the buyer would issue the supplier a P.D. cheque. On one such occassion this happened and the cheque was subsequently stopped, since there was a large rebate given to this supplier by the manufacturer to be paid to the buyer. The buyer knew that there was a large rebate coming but the supplier did not credit the buyers account hoping he can buy a few months before the buyer became aware of this. The buyer found this out and stopped the payment. The supplier takes the buyer to the court and the buyer argues that the supplier did not properly credit his account, the supplier argued that the buyer had been properly credited and since the buyer had issued the supplier a PD cheque this is an admission by the buyer that the monies are owed. The judge pointed out that giving a P.D. cheque is not considered an admission of debt.

 

But dont mistake the above with acquiring with intent to deceive. i.e. if you pay for a product in a shop and then stop a payment, that would be deception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good info HM, thanks. But, did the judge not say WHY it is not considered an admission of debt? And out of interest, is this considered the case with any cheque, or just PD cheques?

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I do not see why issuing a cheque - postdated or otherwise - would be considered an admission of debt. Paying in cash does not constitute such an admission...

 

 

Halifax (current accounts, credit card, old mortgage, secured loan)

thread here

 

MBNA (three credit cards)

thread here

firstdirect (a current account, two mortgage accounts, old loans, old credit card)

they've sold my current account. thread here.

 

Royal Mail

Claim issued by former employer Royal Mail, thread here.

I counterclaimed and won. They paid in full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was always under the impression that there was (technically)no such thing as a post dated cheque.

 

I seem to recall in the past that the Inland Revenue were/are famous for banking post dated cheques upon receipt.

Cahoot - Rejection of offer sent 14/06/07

 

Barclaycard - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 22/03/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that cases in the County Courts do not set legal precedent, and I've seen some odd decisions made by county court judges in the past! It can't be taken as gospel.

 

I'm no expert on banking matters but I also did not believe that dates in the future prevented a cheque from being cashed.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to know that MY bank largely ignore the date on the cheque unless it is "unreasonably distant" from the date of presentation. i.e. if I attempted to bank a cheque which was dated 19th January 2024 or 19th January 1966, the bank would probably reject it! However if they decide to present the cheque regardless of the date written on it, then it will be presented and if guaranteed it will be paid upon presentation.

 

If you wish a debt or bill to be paid later, then issue the cheque later.

a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought a cheque cant be cashed before the date of issue as well, but the bank told me that post dated cheques are illegal, I asked the bank when the same thing happened to me a few weeks ago.

 

Then your bank are misinformed. It has never been a criminal offence to put a future date on a cheque, nor will it ever be. It is however an unlawful document which the banks could at their own discretion reject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the booklet that came from National Girobank when I opened my first cheque account said cheques were valid only from the date on them for a period of six months. They cautioned that postdated or expired cheques would not be honoured and that in the case of postdated, they would charge for bouncing them.

 

There was also some contradictory rubbish about postdating and using a guarantee card - postdating invalidated the guarantee. But the T&Cs of the guarantee card said that cheques bearing the card number may be honoured even if there are "technical irregularities" and one example they gave was the date.

Halifax (current accounts, credit card, old mortgage, secured loan)

thread here

 

MBNA (three credit cards)

thread here

firstdirect (a current account, two mortgage accounts, old loans, old credit card)

they've sold my current account. thread here.

 

Royal Mail

Claim issued by former employer Royal Mail, thread here.

I counterclaimed and won. They paid in full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issuing a post dated is an offence only if it is intended to defraud another otherwise it's ok.

 

However most banks just ignore post dated cheques & honour them upon presentation but if they do & you become overdrawnas a result thereby incurring penalty charges you have an argument for a refund

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Something similar just happened to me.

 

Moving house and gave the new landlord a cheque for £1300 that was dated for the 25th of April. He put it through this week and it has taken me way over my overdraft.

 

Called the Abbey as I though they were not supposed to put it through till the date on it – yet they say they don’t recognize post dated cheques.

 

Yet another bank charge coming my way because someone I gave a cheque to didn’t follow my simple instructuions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had the same problem with pd chqs.

 

I have given them out only to fine thant they have been cashed even though the date was in the future, then i would get charged by my bank for cashing them only to be told there is no longer such thing as a pd chq, this also happened to a friend.

 

So i stopped doing it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

the bank have a clause which states, that while they do not accept post dated cheques they reserve the right to pay any cheques that are missed. To be blunt cheques missed at the first point of contact ie bank, are rarely checked up to a certain amount and so far none of the amounts mentioned is at that limit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The date on a cheque is meant to be the date on which you signed it. It would probably be clearer if the space for the date was beside the signature.

 

Not sure how it's done now, but cheques used to be processed by clerks who only really looked at the figures - these would be typed into a machine as the cheque flashed past, which would then print the amount in magnetis type on the bottom (there is a space next to the account number for this). The words, date and signature would be ignored unless the cheque was queried for some reason. So there's no point in postdating a cheque anyway, nobody reads it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I have ever read such misinformation on any other thread on this forum as exists on this one.

Cheques were initially governed by the Bills of Exchange Act 1882. And bills

of exchange were issued with two dates-the date of issue, and the date

when the bill was to be paid-often several months in advance.

 

Since then, there have been a Cheques Act 1957 and another in 1992, and

part of the 1882 Act has been deregulated partly to accomodate banks to

pay cheques in a central office obviating the need to send their cheques

to individual branches for clearance.

At no time, as far as I can see, has the facility to postdate a cheque ever

been abolished. Indeed certain companies often ask their prospective clients

to deliberately post date their cheques as a guarantee they the cheque will

not be presented before that date should they not be alloctaed they shares the applied for, or the goods sent on approval were returned.

 

I am aware that certain banks do now stipulate that they frown on the use

of customers postdating cheques, but I believe those banks are reneging on

the contract that exists between themselves and their customers when they

take such action.

 

A cheque is an instruction by the drawer of the cheque to pay a specified

amount to a payee on, or after, a certain date which the drawer then signs

to confirm his intentions. Those insructions are supposed to be honoured by

the bank, providing the funds are available.

 

That the banks have not always honoured this procedure is evidenced by the

need for the Cheques Act 1992. Where the drawer had specifically marked

the cheque "account payee only", the bankers were ignoring that instruction

and allowing the cheque to be transferred to other accounts. So the

1992 Act spelt it out for them. Now things

have gone the other way and virtually all chequebooks issued have the

cheques so marked [account payee only]. This makes life so much easier for banks since they do

not have the worry of concerning themselves with endorsements on the back of cheques.

And so it is with postdated cheques. By asking customers not to postdate

cheques, it makes life even easier for the banks. They have one less factor

to concern themselves with when paying cheques. And make no mistake, the

banks are liable when they pay a cheque that should not have been paid.

I am only surprised that they have not tried to prevent customers from

stopping cheques.

 

This is an extract from the British Bankers Association on postdated cheques

Sometimes customers 'post-date' a cheque. This is a date in the future and essentially means that the customer intends that the bank will not pay the cheque earlier than the date inserted on the cheque. If a post-dated cheque is paid in before the date on the cheque the bank may pay it or return it marked ?post-dated'. Most banks do not encourage post-dating cheques. You should be careful to ensure that a post-dated cheque is not presented to a bank before the date on the cheque. Some banks state in their terms and conditions that they will pay a post dated cheque on first presentation if the cheque is otherwise in order.

 

Quite clearly then it is not unlawful to postdate cheques, it's just that banks

are weaselling out of their responsibilty to accede to their customers

instructions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The date on a cheque is meant to be the date on which you signed it. It would probably be clearer if the space for the date was beside the signature.

 

Where does it state that the date is the date the cheque was issued? The date is in fact the date before which the cheque should not be paid by order of the drawer.

 

Not sure how it's done now, but cheques used to be processed by clerks who only really looked at the figures - these would be typed into a machine as the cheque flashed past, which would then print the amount in magnetis type on the bottom (there is a space next to the account number for this). The words, date and signature would be ignored unless the cheque was queried for some reason. So there's no point in postdating a cheque anyway, nobody reads it!

 

I think you are confusing two different processes. The magnetic

type is added to the cheque by the bank where the cheque is paid in.

But it is the bank that holds the account on which the cheque is drawn that

is responsible to see that the cheque is in order before it is paid. And they

are supposed to check everything-the date; that there is a payee; the

amount in words and figures agree;that the cheque has been signed by

the drawer [and not been forged] and there is not a "stop" on the cheque.

 

In practice now I understand, much of that has fallen by the wayside, but

the banks do run the risk of being held accountable should things go wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lookinforinfo, I'm afraid you are wrong in almost all of your interpretations of the above. The magnetic type is in fact added by the drawer's bank, or at least it was when I had the job of doing it.

 

The 1992 Act is irrelevant, it says nothing about postdating.

 

It may well be that Bills of Exchange had two dates on them, but cheques only have the one. This is the date of issue of the cheque, and it should be the date on which the cheque is issued.

 

You can find nothing to abolish the facility to postdate a cheque because that facility never actually existed.

 

As you say, the British Bankers Association are clear that it is legal to present a postdated cheque and that it is the drawer's responsibility to ensure that this doesn't happen. As you helpfully quote, they say:

 

You should be careful to ensure that a post-dated cheque is not presented to a bank before the date on the cheque. Some banks state in their terms and conditions that they will pay a post dated cheque on first presentation if the cheque is otherwise in order.

 

That seems perfectly clear to me.

 

B-B

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...