My husband receives social security checks and currently is out of town. He asked me again to cash his check, as so I take it to a check cashing place, sign it, gave them my id and they kept the check stating I was trying to cash someone elses check. I explained he was my husband and they said he needed to come in or they can call the cops or send the check back to SS. Am I not allowed to sign and cash my husbands check in the state of AZ??

Thats about right

A SS check/payments is a contract between the recipient (hubby in this case) and the government, and is not taken lightly to having someone else trying to cash it ... next to fraud I believe.

Who knows if hubby is not separated/divorced from you, has left you and not yet made the change of address to the Govt' or could have been dead for 6-months (an example only)

Would you allow anyone to cash your check, even if it was your husband or one of your kids?

One suggestion to consider is to get the darn thing direct deposit ... cures the problems and hassles I would think

Hi mggm. Welcome to AnswerPool. I think the check cashing place was trying to protect themselves. I think you should call the police to retrieve the check. I suggest in future that you use direct deposit to avoid problems.

Proof of ID

When my Mom used to cash my Dads SS check she'd take a medical ID card of my Dad plus a utility bill with proof of residence Headed with his Name (and ID of herself)

Moral of the story find out what is acceptable ID with these people first It does vary.

They should have a list posted in view. If you cannot see it, Ask. They'll only be too glad to tell you what they want to see.
All they want to do is protect their money .

And Once you know the drill You'll have no Problems with the system

Bedstor, the USA and the UK are different, when it comes to collecting another persons social benefits, unlike going to the local village post-office where everyone knows you.

I would be interested to hear back from mggm if she made it through, and why she went to a cash checking place, again all without checking with the social security folks first?

Just a thought as I don't know how the System setup works.Can you ask the SS to pay into the persons bank account instead of issuing a check?
The UK has switched over to this way of doing things and they now only issue a check if asked in advance, or in an emergency crisis.

quote:

Originally posted by bedstor:
Just a thought as I don't know how the System setup works.Can you ask the SS to pay into the persons bank account instead of issuing a check?
The UK has switched over to this way of doing things and they now only issue a check if asked in advance, or in an emergency crisis.

read back, I believe that mggm has been advised to do th D.D by clarebear and myself up top.

That is, as you have pointed out the best way to receive payments from the government by D.D and stops any hassles

If she was going to a "check cashing place" it seems obvious that she doesn't have a bank account in which her SS check could have been DD'd. No?

When you are poor and live from month-to-month, there is no money left over to open a checking account. That, coupled with a few other niceties, are part of the life of poverty that most never realize.

Dorian, everything you just posted is true, however in the case of mggm, what do we have here (a review)!

1. A person trying to cash her hubby's SS check?
2. Question whether indeed she is rightfully allowed to do so
3. A check cashing place, Vs, DD or going to the bank
4. Whether mggm, is poor (by definition) since the post originating on here should be questioned as to its origin, whether from mggm herself or someone else that can afford a computer and internet, at a place of work or library.

It would nice to hear back from mggm on the outcome of her check cashing ordeal of hubby's SS check, and a response to the postings made on here.

The guy at the check cashing place is a big loser for taking the check but not cashing the check is the right thing to do. It's a legitimate protection - what if your kid was a drug abuser and intercepted mail and went to the check cashing place and got a sympathetic person to cash a check. Or what if wife and husband are separated and wife is stealing checks out of mail box... it could easily be a mail fraud situation.

Seems a bit heavy handed to keep the check but legitimate and probably protects more people than it hurts.

I question his legal right to hold the uncashed check. If he feels a crime was being committed, then he is withholding evidence from the police. If no crime was being committed, why is he holding the check?

Jqanus, I based my response on what we were given. We can "suppose" a number of things, one of which is that the check cashing place is a scam to steal checks. But we really have only what we were told about this incident. I haven't checked Arizona law, but every other state I checked when a similar question came up before stated in their state laws that the intent to defraud must be present before signing another's name to a check becomes a crime. If Arizona is the same, and I have no reason to think that it is not, it seems the only crime here is the holding of the check by the check cashing business.

Arizona Revised Statutes §13-2002 Forgery; classification

A. A person commits forgery if, with intent to defraud, the person:

1. Falsely makes, completes or alters a written instrument; or

2. Knowingly possesses a forged instrument; or

3. Offers or presents, whether accepted or not, a forged instrument or one that contains false information.

B. The possession of five or more forged instruments may give rise to an inference that the instruments are possessed with an intent to defraud.

C. Forgery is a class 4 felony.

http://law.justia.com/arizona/codes/title13/02002.html

Arizona Revised Statutes §13-2001 Definitions

6. "Falsely completes a written instrument" means to transform an incomplete written instrument into a complete one by adding, inserting or changing matter without the permission of anyone entitled to grant it, so that the complete written instrument falsely appears or purports to be in all respects an authentic creation of its ostensible maker or authorized by him.

7. "Falsely makes a written instrument" means to make or draw a complete or incomplete written instrument that purports to be an authentic creation of its ostensible maker but that is not either because the ostensible maker is fictitious, or because, if real, the ostensible maker did not authorize the making or drawing of the written instrument.

http://law.justia.com/arizona/codes/title13/02001.html

You are citing forgery laws and this falls under mail fraud, larceny laws and/or identity theft laws. I'm sure that cases such as this one are rational for setting rigid standards for cashing SS checks.

Or this case

Financial Abuse

By law, in order to cash someone else's SS check you must be appointed a representative payee. This must be done formally through the SS Administration.

The clerk was probably following procedure and most likely notified the SS administration. I'm sure that if her husband appeared, the check would be returned but she isn't going to be able to claim it without being appointed representative payee by contacting the SS admin.

I will assume that you are correct about federal laws applying to cashing SS checks. However, none of the links you provided were on point. None deal with the honest cashing of a spouses check; all dealt with the intent to defraud. Further, none deal with a check-cashing business' right to keep a check that they refused to cash.

If you go to the SS website, you can read about the process of representative payees. By rights spouses aren't any more legal than anyone else unless registered. There is no distinction made for relatives unless the paperwork is filled out.

Look at it this way, how is someone supposed to determine a legitimate spouse from an estranged spouse? The protection is there because clerks can't make the decision and have no way to check except the person's photo id matching the name on the check along with SS card. Why the clerk held the check? Probably a standard procedure when anyone tries to pass someone else's government check. Probably because a clerk working in a check cashing booth isn't going to be able to determine who is trying to defraud and who is just in a simple bind.

Theft of funds probably happens with legitimate spouses more than with any other relative stealing... think of all the women on public assistance who wouldn't have a dime due to over-powering husbands taking their checks and cashing them.

It would all be different if there was a joint bank account to cash the check into.

By the way, most banks will offer a free checking account to anyone that direct deposits a regular check such as Social Security or payroll into an account. Social security offers direct deposit at no cost and this opens the door to not have to pay check cashing fees for the check or to have this hassle.

There is no need for me to go to the SS site. I already accepted what you said about a formal process for becoming a representative payee. Please address the issue of the check cashing company keeping the check. (I assume it was not covered in the SS site, or else you would have made mention of it.) What is their legal right to keep a document that clearly does not belong to them? They did not issue it; they are not the payee; they did not pay for it. If it is evidence in a crime, shouldn't it be turned over to the police? If it is not evidence in a crime, shouldn't they return it? By what legal rights do they keep it? Of course, they can protect themselves by refusing to cash a check, but where does it state that they have the right to keep what is very obviously not theirs?



If you or one of the other members here tried to cash a check and the business simply refused to cash it and refused to return it. what would your reactions be then? Would you still see it the business protecting itself?

quote:

He asked me again to cash his check, as so I take it to a check cashing place, sign it, gave them my id and they kept the check stating I was trying to cash someone elses check.

There's no way in h*** they would have kept a check that I took in there. It didn't belong to them. I would have been the one calling the police on them. I might not could've cashed it but I would have taken it back home.