cheque in baby's name.....

[lmb79]

Please someone help me before me and other half have a falling out of great magnitude.....
So the story goes like this, the mother in law made a cheque out in baby's name, i opened an account for him which means he can't touch it till he's 18+.
Then other half tells me the money was for furniture for baby's room (he hasn't got anything yet!) so i called the bank and i can't access it, which i knew anyway but to just prove it to partner.
So he said, partner that is, that i should have put the cheque into my account in the first place and we wouldn't be in this sorry mess!

So the matter is... if the cheque is made out to Moses Martin, can Gwyneth Paltrow put it in her account and use the money to buy new drawers????!
(hind sight and all that)

thank you all in advance xxxxxxx

I don't think you can, it's not a cheque for you. Though someone may well prove me wrong!

Okay so I used to work got a savings company, but no you cannot, if the cheque is in your child's name then it has to go into an account in that name.

Ideally if it was for furniture then it should of been in your or your partners name. So don't accept the blame for this.

I work in a bank (I know, I know - sorry) and I can confirm that you wouldn't be able to pay the cheque into your account if it was made out in the name of your child.

Your only choices were to open an account in the child's name (as you did) or ask your MIL for a replacement cheque in your name.

No u can't. Chq has to go into a/c of the person named on the chq.

What you should have done was open an account as trustee for baby, that way you your partner (or both) sign to take funds out.
Are you sure that you can't take the money back out? How long since you opened the a/c? You may have a 14day clause or something that always you to change ur mind?

Cheques have to go into the account of the person names in the cheque. You are not psychic, and there is no reason for you to have thought the cheque was not intended to go towards savings for your child.

When I opened my DS's savings account it was set up as 'my' account as the responsible adult, but nominally his until age 16. I've made deposits and withdrawals on his behalf. I would check with the bank because I don't think, even though the account is in the baby's name, they expect a baby to manage their own money.

When you say 'can't touch it until he's 18+' do you mean the bank persuaded you to open something other than an ordinary savings account?

What cogito said - surely the adult who opens an account on the child's behalf is responsible for managing it and can therefore make withdrawals?

Otherwise any money put into a child's account would be locked up and inaccessible until 16 or 18, which is definitely not the case. I'm pretty sure I've made withdrawals from DS's building society account when he's wanted to spend some saved-up Christmas money on something.

Unless you have opened some kind of child trust fund-style account which is intended to lock the money up until age 18?

That's what I'm thinking exexpat. Trust fund, Junior ISA that sort of thing means the money is tied up and, if the OP has taken one of those out by mistake, I think they'd struggle to get access if they're outside the cooling off period. Normal savings accounts for children are designated as belonging to the parent and HMRC starts to take an interest if the balance is high enough.

Pretty sure that you could have indorsed the cheque on behalf of the child and paid it into your account, although I have no authoritative reference to hand (the law relating to cheques is complex and arcane having changed little since the Bills of Exchange Act 1882).

Of course if the money was given with any conditions that prevented you from using it to buy drawers this may be theft.

I don't know if you are still around op but twice I paid cheques for my babes into my account. The banks didnt question it and I didn't draw their attention to it.
I did it because time was running out and I couldn't find a child ordinary savings account, they all had to have the parents name on them, otherwise it can be seen as a tax dodge unless you're talking a Child Trust Fund. I think they are have brought out a child ISA account which is what you may have had.
Sorry not much help.

I disagree about endorsing the cheque especially as most cheques have 'account payee' printed on them which means they have to go into an account of the person the cheque was written out to. My 2 have bog standard bank accounts but I am a named person and can withdraw money from them if required. If you have opened an trust fund account then you wouldnt be able to access the funds as they are purely in the child's name.

shandybass, the bank should never have allowed those cheques to be paid in and the staff members would be in trouble if it was found out

most cheques have 'account payee' printed on them which means they have to go into an account of the person the cheque was written out to

What makes you think that?

this does:

Crossed cheques

The rules concerning crossed cheques are set out in Section 1 of the Cheques Act of 1992 and prevent cheques being cashed by or paid into the accounts of third parties. On a crossed cheque the words ?account payee only? (or similar) are printed between two parallel vertical lines in the centre of the cheque. This makes the cheque non-transferable and is to avoid cheques being endorsed and paid into an account other than that of the named payee. Crossing cheques basically ensures that the money is paid into an account of the intended beneficiary of the cheque.

From here (plus I worked in a bank!!)

I agree with Seona. It is no longer possible for a payee to sign the back of a cheque to allow it to be paid into an account in someone else's name.
This process was stopped because of fraud - the bank accepting the cheque had no way of knowing if the signature on the reverse was genuine. And they would be held liable if it did turn out to be fraudulent.
It's all a bit hypothetical in this case anyway as the child wouldn't be able to sign the reverse of the cheque.

With Seona and exexpat - DD has a bank account which my bank have listed as mine and even linked to my online bank account. This means that cheques can go in there but I can transfer the money to my account once its cleared funds - and afraid that mummy has embezzled this a few times +

Interesting, I am sure that I have in practice done this since 1992 which is when the law changed - perhaps I reopened the cheque.

Also presumably the only person who is entitled to bring an action would be the payee, and if the payee has purportedly (albeit ineffectually) indorsed the cheque they would again presumably be estopped from any such action: is this what the side street cheque cashers rely on (with their large discounts to cater for identity fraud)? Or could the drawer bring an action?

The fact that a minor may not be physically capable of signing an indorsement is irrelevant, a parent can act as the agent for a child, as he or she does when opening an account in the child's name for which the parent is the signatory.

MrAnchovy either the payee or drawer of the cheque could query what happened to it. Presumably the payee would contact the drawer in the first instance to advise the cheque had not been received, lost or whatever.
When the drawer queried it with their bank it would be identified that it had already been paid.
The accepting bank would then be liable for accepting a cheque into an account in a name other than that of the original payee - hence the reason why the practice has stopped. The accepting bank has no way of verifying that the signature on the back of the cheque is that of the original payee - so they would be taking it on good faith. Which sadly can't be relied upon in some cases.