Re: RESTRICTIVE ENDORSEMENTS

Posted by cddfisher (152.163.189.170) on March 29, 2003 at 23:24:54:

In Reply to: Re: RESTRICTIVE ENDORSEMENTS posted by Why Chat on March 29, 2003 at 13:18:46:

I agree with whychat that restrictive endorsements are basically worthless. First, virtually every credit agreement I have ever reviewed has a clause that says the creditor can accept any payment whether marked paid in full or otherwise and you agree they still retain all rights. Second, the Uniform Commercial Code in most states carries in Section 1-207 the ability of the endorser to reserve all rights on the check or with a followup demand letter. Even though some states have modified that right by indicating it does not apply to what is called an "accord and satisfaction" which are attempts to settle disputes, most Courts find in accordance with the Code there had to be a "bona fide" dispute (that is the accord) for the satisfaction to be applied. General dispute letters usually dont work absent specific facts surrounding the dispute. The result of all this is the creditor or collection agent simply applying your partial payment and seeking the balance.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup