New check stock with only a single signature?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1345
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Austin TX
- Contact:
New check stock with only a single signature?
Our ward just opened the latest batch of blank check stock, and we were surprised to find that the checks have only a single signature block. Historically the checks have had blocks for two signatures, and both were required.
Is this a change in policy, or an error in printing?
Is this a change in policy, or an error in printing?
-
- Community Moderators
- Posts: 11482
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
- Location: US
The last time this happened to us, we called the Finance Department, and they said it was a misprint. That was many years ago. Times may have changed. I would get confirmation before I used them, however. Were there any instructions in the box?boomerbubba wrote:Our ward just opened the latest batch of blank check stock, and we were surprised to find that the checks have only a single signature block. Historically the checks have had blocks for two signatures, and both were required.
Is this a change in policy, or an error in printing?
- aebrown
- Community Administrator
- Posts: 15153
- Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
- Location: Draper, Utah
Our stake just received new check stock, and it also has only one signature line. So it's either a new policy (I doubt it) or a more widespread mistake in printing (that's my guess).lajackson wrote:The last time this happened to us, we called the Finance Department, and they said it was a misprint. That was many years ago. Times may have changed. I would get confirmation before I used them, however. Were there any instructions in the box?
The notice in the box simply said that if there were any errors to contact our provider.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1345
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Austin TX
- Contact:
I called Finance support yesterday. They said it was a misprint. They are expediting a new batch. Hope it arrives soon.Alan_Brown wrote:Our stake just received new check stock, and it also has only one signature line. So it's either a new policy (I doubt it) or a more widespread mistake in printing (that's my guess).
The notice in the box simply said that if there were any errors to contact our provider.
p.s. I meant to post this feedback last night, but the tech.lds.org servers were down.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:13 pm
- Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Seems widespread. We just got a batch of single-line checks too.boomerbubba wrote:Our ward just opened the latest batch of blank check stock, and we were surprised to find that the checks have only a single signature block. Historically the checks have had blocks for two signatures, and both were required.
Is this a change in policy, or an error in printing?
-
- Community Moderators
- Posts: 11482
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
- Location: US
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1345
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Austin TX
- Contact:
I would guess that the answer to the second question is yes, you need to call and report the error. Be prepared for a long wait listening to hymns.lajackson wrote:Is it Ok to use the checks and put two signatures on them, or do we just need to wait until new checks arrive.
And do we each need to call in and let them know we got single line checks?
As for whether it is okay to use the checks, we already did out of necessity on Sunday, and I called on Monday. I asked the same question, and was told, "You're going to want to use the new checks, not the old ones."
Since that was not definitive -- what I want is not the issue -- I kicked the decision to the Bishop last night when we needed to write two more emergency checks. We wrote them.
In all cases, we have signed the checks with two signatures, even though there is only one signature line.
-
- Community Administrator
- Posts: 34513
- Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
- Location: U.S.
In this situation, I'd fire off an email via MLS. I don't see a benefit to the call.boomerbubba wrote:I would guess that the answer to the second question is yes, you need to call and report the error. Be prepared for a long wait listening to hymns.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
- mkmurray
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
- Location: Utah
- Contact:
I'm not saying this is actually true in anyway, but I wouldn't be surprised if CHQ can somehow identify the "batch" of bad checks and automatically resend them to the affected units. However, better to be safe than sorry, and either call or perhaps MLS message as RussellHltn suggested.boomerbubba wrote:I would guess that the answer to the second question is yes, you need to call and report the error. Be prepared for a long wait listening to hymns.lajackson wrote:Is it Ok to use the checks and put two signatures on them, or do we just need to wait until new checks arrive.
And do we each need to call in and let them know we got single line checks?