822
823

My wife received a $200k settlement and her sister forged her name and deposited into her own account. They have a nice house, two brand new cars and her husband makes over $100k a year but she is telling my wife she has spent the money. Can anyone help me with my options. (self.legaladvice)

DustyCrist が 投稿

I found out that she had the attorney send her sister the check six months ago. She had been telling me that the insurance company had just not sent the check yet. She just told me that her sister was supposed to pay her back before I found out about it. I don't know what to believe now, but I know for sure that she forged her name, she lives in another state. I'm in Indiana

全 195 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Aghast_Cornichon 748 ポイント749 ポイント  (123子コメント)

This reads to me like OP's wife diverted $200K to her sister in order to prevent it from becoming a marital asset.

Which she probably didn't have to: if it was a medical or accident settlement, it would have been considered the property of the injured person, not marital property.

From OP's other thread:

She then admitted that she had the attorney send her sister the check six months ago.

OP needs to get a clear answer from his wife about why she did this. If his wife directed her attorney to send the settlement funds to a third party, there may have been no forgery at all.

[–]DustyCrist[S] 169 ポイント170 ポイント  (71子コメント)

I believe that she did have it sent to her sister with the intent of her depositing the check. The check was sent directly from the attorney to her sister that lives in another state. Can she legally sign her name and deposit it? My wife did not endorse the check. I believe that her sister forged her name but with her permission. Is that legal for her to do?

[–]Brad_WesleyQuality Contributor 984 ポイント985 ポイント  (59子コメント)

They are all lying to you. She is planning on divorcing you and doesn't want you to get any of the money.

Most likely the divorce judge will see right through this and demand bank records of everyone involved.

[–]nowitholds 222 ポイント223 ポイント  (24子コメント)

Ah, man... this makes a lot of sense, but for OP's sake I hope it isn't :(

[–]lucidrage 193 ポイント194 ポイント  (22子コメント)

this makes a lot of sense, but for OP's sake I hope it isn't :(

For all we know, op might be an abusive shit and the sister-in-law is just trying to help her sister. We'll need to know both sides of the narrative.

[–]danweber 73 ポイント74 ポイント  (6子コメント)

True, but we tend to take the OPs at their word.

If the someone says they were falsely accused of punching someone, we'll tell them how to get out of it. If someone says they were punched and the assailant is claiming they didn't do it, we'll tell them how to turn the screws.

[–]Xombieshovel 174 ポイント175 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Too many people come to this subreddit and just try to find ways to poke holes in OP and their story. It's getting in the way of decent advice and every starred users reaction is just a variation of "if you want legal advice you should hire a lawyer - not go to Reddit"; which while true, is missing the unspoken agreement:

You come, share your story, we get all the tasty drama, and you get some rudimentary advice from "not your lawyers".

Too often we devolve into some sort of investigatory circle jerk where we all high five each other after pointing out that it would of been impossible to drive 32 miles in 12 minutes and therefore OP must be lying about their role in the robbery. If we're not holding up our part of the unspoken agreement, we're like to not get many more people coming to share their stories about an incestous marriage and a $350k ranch style home in Iowa.

[–]UltimoSuperDragon 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (13子コメント)

We don't know anything for sure, but when something stinks like shit, most of the time - it's shit.

Odds are she is planning on a divorce and is scummily diverting funds around to avoid paying him his 1/2. The big question to me is whether the SIL will actually give it back or might just double cross her and keep it or not.

[–]krunchytacos 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (5子コメント)

If the check was actually sent by an attorney, then they would be avoiding doing something illegal like diverting marital funds prior to a divorce. That means the settlement check isn't considered a marital asset. The likely scenario is that the wife was concerned that the husband would take control of the money and so the attorney asked if there was someone she trusted to hold the funds until she is legally able to separate her finances from her husband.

It's not scummy because the husband isn't entitled to any of the money. The insurance money is intended to support her future medical needs. If she cant trust her husband not to use the funds for his own purposes, then having her sister control them is most likely the best case situation.

[–]questionsfoyou -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (4子コメント)

That means the settlement check isn't considered a marital asset.

How is this not a marital asset? They're still married. If she's trying to keep this asset separate, it isn't going to work. A judge will simply demand everyone's bank records and see right through this.

[–]krunchytacos 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because it's not earnings. Lets say you had a serious accident. The money paid out as settlement is to pay for future medical expenses as well as compensate you for pain and suffering that you incur.

A judge wouldn't demand the funds returned. Here's the first thing that pops up on google when I search for personal injury and marital property:

If the money received as a personal injury settlement is deemed compensation for pain and suffering, it will not be considered community property. These funds are the property of the recipient only, since it was that individual who experienced the discomfort following the accident.

It makes sense. Lets say you lose both your legs in an accident and you get a settlement for 1 million dollars. Your spouse divorces you and takes half. As the injured, that money, at least in part is intended for things like physical therapy, pain meds, doctors visits, prosthesis, etc. Now you may not have the funds to cover the cost of your injury over the course of your lifetime. They are also not going to share in the pain and hardship of your personal injury. Your spouse can't give you one of their good legs as part of your divorce settlement, why would you assume they should give up the funds that are intended to support them through their personal injury?

[–]questionsfoyou 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I should have clarified. I meant that they were marital assets to the extent necessary to recoup expended marital assets. So, in your scenario, if the person loses both their legs and the couple spent $300,000 in surgeries, therapy, medications, DMEs, etc. and then received a $1,000,000 settlement, $300,000 of that amount would be considered marital assets. I agree that the remaining $700,000 would be property of the married individual.

[–]ooogoodlawd 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Settlements and inheritance are usually not marital assets unless they got commingled with marital funds. The wife was 100% within her rights to do with the settlement whatever she pleased.

[–]lucidrage 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The big question to me is whether the SIL will actually give it back or might just double cross her and keep it or not.

So much for family ties I suppose...

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_KIDS_SSN 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (5子コメント)

The other person's comment went over your head. They agree that she's diverting funds, they're saying you have no right to continue making uneducated judgement calls about whether or not she has valid motives for doing so.

[–]TheActualAWdeV 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

the only thing you can really say is that this money is being diverted. Saying it must be because OP is a dick is uncalled for.

[–]Swayze_Train 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

We have as much right to conjecture in that direction as in any other.

[–]doughboy011 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Just because you have the right to doesn't mean you aren't being foolish doing so.

[–]Swayze_Train 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Right but the post I replied to literally said "no right".

That's not a phrase to use liberally.

[–]paperairplanerace 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes lol, you do have the right to do a lot of kinds of douchey pointless things.

[–]Italian_Nerd 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't understand this inquisitive stance. We don't need to know both sides of the narrative, we are not the judges.

[–]jlynnbizatch 83 ポイント84 ポイント  (23子コメント)

Seriously. I mean, you don't just walk into a bank with a check for $200K, deposit it, and be on your merry way, especially if it's an insurance check. There is grade A funny business going on here.

[–]hickory29 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (20子コメント)

That's exactly what happens at the bank, they may put a hold on the funds or verify the funds, but depositing checks (even $200k) is not uncommon. What else would you expect to happen?

[–]westkms 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This doesn't happen if the check is addressed to someone whose name is not on the account. I was in a situation where more than one person tried to sign a large check over to our business (very long and boring story). They gave me power of attorney. They also submitted a signed, notarized letter explaining the situation, the reason, and how they really wanted this check to go into the business account.

There wasn't a teller or a branch that would touch this with a 10 foot pole. They told me that - maybe - they would do it if the person came in and signed the check over in their presence. But they'd need to get the big manager to make some calls to corporate to get permission. And they'd probably need the notary there to have the person sign some other forms.

Most people were able to either deposit in their account and pay us, but a couple convinced our bank to let them deposit the check in our account. Though the latter meant that we had more than a normal hold. It took about 2 months for those funds to become available in our account.

So either the wife opened a joint account with sister in law, or the wife deposited her check directly into sister in law's account, or sister-in-law never had the check. My guess is that there is a bank account that OP doesn't know exists.

Edit: the point being that SIL couldn't just sign his wife's name and go deposit this check into an account that doesn't have wife's name on it.

[–]jlynnbizatch 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (17子コメント)

If it's an insurance check, they'll likely verify it with the issuing bank and possibly also the insurance company. Likewise, you'll need ID to deposit the insurance check. Sister can forge the signature all she wants but that check isn't getting deposited into her account without OP's wife present.

[–]hickory29 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (16子コメント)

Like I said they may verify it, but if you are simply depositing a check no ID is required. I can walk into any bank and deposit cash or checks into any account that I have the account # for. I don't need to be an authorized signer, or have any relationship to the account holder. If you sent me your bank name and account number I could walk into a bank and put $100 in your account without ID (no I won't). The amount of the deposit is of no consequence other than the items I discussed above (verify funds /hold).

As OPs story is somewhat unclear we don't know how exactly the check was deposited/cashed and who the authorized users on the account are.

[–]jlynnbizatch 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Personal checks, yes. Insurance settlement checks are treated a bit differently though.

[–]loverurallife 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (2子コメント)

true. When my ex and I were separated, our house was burglarized. Since we hadn't yet changed all our homeowners paperwork, the insurance company sent a check made out to the both of us. He had to come to the bank with me and endorse the check so I could deposit it.

[–]jlynnbizatch 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly. We're dealing with an issue from an insurance check that was issued to my husband and his father. His dad died between when the check was issued and when we received it and we've been having the worst time getting it deposited since FIL is (obviously) not available to sign for it.

[–]hickory29 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is because the check was made out to both of you and cannot be negotiated without both parties present or deposited into an account that doesn't have both parties listed as account owners.

[–]hickory29 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That difference is that they will likely put a hold on the funds and might verify funds, and maybe if a 3rd party was depositing it into my account they might ( not required) give me a courtesy call.

[–]LadyA052 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I had a friend without her ID who was unable to put cash into her OWN account because she couldn't prove who she was. Maybe it's a California thing.

[–]hickory29 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I would bet she didn't have the account # as I deposit funds into various business accounts and family members accounts (with deposit slips or the account #) fairly regularly. Could be a California thing too as every state has its own banking regulations.

[–]LadyA052 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

She said she had everything but her ID. And she asked them what the problem would be if anybody wanted to put cash in her account...ha.

[–]EricaKaz 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

I worked for a bank, if the check wasn't in the depositors name, they would not be allowed to deposit it. Of course all banks are different, and all tellers are different. I'm sure there are ways around it.

[–]AtlasMacgyver 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Read through for this comment. The wife has an account with the sister for a check of that size to clear and use the funds. Otherwise it would've bounced once the back office reviewed the titles.

Wife has account with sister / telling OP the money is gone? Doesn't sound like a good wake up call for OP.

[–]EricaKaz -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not a good situation regardless, wife's lying, OPs getting screwed.

[–]questionsfoyou 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I worked for a bank, if the check wasn't in the depositors name, they would not be allowed to deposit it. Of course all banks are different, and all tellers are different. I'm sure there are ways around it.

A check is a negotiable instrument. If a depositor presented your bank with a third-party endorsed check and you didn't accept it, it seems to me you would be violating the UCC. Otherwise, what good is a negotiable instrument if it can't be negotiated?

[–]Haydens_Army 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thank you. This was the the point that was bothering me. Something doesn't add up and OP has gone silent...not a good sign.

[–]EricaKaz 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh yeah, for sure. That's why I commented. It's highly unlikely it went down as described. And made even more fishy by the fact that he's no longer responding.

[–]Haydens_Army 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your synopsis is on point. The last part bothers me. The check isn't made out to the sister...it's made out to OP's wife. Even if she did "forge" the endorsement it sounds like the wife was in on it. OP has gone eerily silent in the comments...and I think we all agree that it just doesn't completely add up.

[–]THEIRONGIANTTT 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's extremely uncommon. I worked at one of the major 3 banks for 2 years and can count of one hand the amount of times we took in a check of over 100,000. It doesn't happen. Anything that large is going to be a wire transfer, the teller that took the transaction would of needed their store managers override, and they would of looked it over for 10+ minutes.

[–]slapdashbr 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I mean, you do, but then you probably put most of it into a ira or w/e

[–]justdrowsin 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I once deposited a large insurance settlement at the ATM.

THE ATM!

Walking away I was like WTF did I just do!?...

It cleared no problem. Same as a $200 check.

[–]Kraus247 59 ポイント60 ポイント  (0子コメント)

^ this right here, take a step back an realize that this was all part of her plan but now that shes being questioned, its lie after lie.

[–]coolfusis 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (2子コメント)

There's also the possibility that the sister-in-law is in severe financial troubles, and OP's wife was trying to bail her out. There was a promise to pay back, which hasn't happened.

Also, there is the possibility that the sister-in-law is involved in some kind of pyramid scheme/scam and conned OP's wife into an "investment", promising that the money would be coming back in the form of dividends. OP's wife is embarrassed, and doesn't want to believe her sister scammed her. She may believe there's a chance of recovery.

The second option is more common than people think, unfortunately. Lots of people recurving windfalls get talked into scammy "investment" advice from family members.

OP needs to talk to his wife and a lawyer. Not Reddit.

[–]lorelatte 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes these are all plausible explanations if the OP has no reason to believe the wife is divorcing him. Or that the wife has deposited the funds in her own new account that she has tucked away.

[–]neverwasahat 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This was my first thought since op says the sister was supposed to pay it back before he found out.

[–]oldjack 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yup. And the sister in law didn't spend it, they're trying to stall/cover it up until after the divorce.

[–]DasSassyPantzen 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Does OP know for fact that SIL got the check and deposited it? I suspect that wife opened a new account and has it tucked away. I wouldn't believe a word she says about this issue. I would also start quietly assessing assets and watching accounts and such. I have a feeling this is just the beginning.

[–]cleveraccountname13 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

My thoughts exactly.

[–]Jin-roh 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah.... wow....

This entire story is starting to sound like the set up of Double Indemnity or some other James Cain or Raymond Chandler noir film.

Honestly, lying about 200k is enough reason to get a divorce anyway. So if I was the OP... I'd be seeing an attorney...

But yeah it sucks.

[–]LilFunyunz 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

this has to be the case. none of this makes any sense without context like a future divorce or something as motivating to hide money.

[–]flamedarkfire 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

$200k charitable donation to "OP's brother-in-law's leukemia foundation."

[–]derspinyQuality Contributor 106 ポイント107 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If your wife gave her sister permission to deposit the check, then it's very unlikely that a prosecutor will bother. The specific rules are somewhat involved, but in practice the laws and norms surrounding negotiable instruments such as checks are largely aimed at malicious actions and fraud upon the parties to the instrument, not at punishing people for incomplete paperwork. For practical purposes, if your wife authorized her sister to deposit the check, then this is going to be a civil dispute.

However, mere possession of the instrument does not imply permission. That's a large part of the point of checks.

[–][deleted] 110 ポイント111 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Buddy - wake up. The advice you got from /r/personalfinance was good. Look objectively about what happened here: your wife lied to you for 6+ months about not getting the check. You did something to bust her lie and she admitted that the check was sent directly to her sister at her behest. Now she's claiming the sister forged her signature, cashed the money, and spent it, but she's completely unwilling to do anything about it?

This is Jerry Springer shit. Since she looked at the last thread, show her this one and ask her the following:

(1) Have you consulted a divorce attorney yet? I assume you've done this to try to hide the assets from a divorce you intend on filing soon;

(2) Regardless of your answer to (1), are you willing to file a police report against your sister for identity theft. If the answer to this is "no", I will know what the answer to (1) is and will file divorce now and seek the money from you.

[–]Aghast_Cornichon 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What's your end goal here ?

Are you and your wife trying to figure out how to get the money back from her sister ? If so, you have to determine the conditions and terms under which your wife directed the check to be sent, rather than focusing on the exact mechanism of how the check was deposited.

What was the nature of the settlement ? You may have no legal standing to do anything about this at all if it was your wife's money.

[–]Shitmybad 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are leaving out so much information.

[–]snknsQuality Contributor 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

From what you are saying, sister-in-law did not forge your wife's name. She signed your wife's name.

Forgery requires an intent to defraud. If your wife said "hey sis got a check for $200k coming your way. Please sign my name and deposit it into your account" then there is no forgery. Sister is following wife's instructions, not defrauding her.

[–]SkyFreighter 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why aren't you mad at your wife? Dude, your wife hid funds from you, her sister AND the attorney helped. Do you think the attorney is going to do anything to jeopardize their license and career, over a check? Does your wife have a reason to hide money from you? Are you a gambling addict? Shitty with money? We are only getting one side of the story.

[–]BobSacramanto 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is that legal for her to do?

If the check was written to wife only (not wife and husband, or wife and business like car repair shop), then wife can delegate authority to sister to sign on her behalf. If check was written to wife and X, then sister would need permission from both parties.

[–]deeztits3 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If the attorney sent the check, he did so from his/her attorney client trust account and he could have put the sisters name on the check if directed by his client. There is a little more too it on the attorney's side, but as far as you are concerned there probably wasn't any forgery. In fact it would be incredibly unethical and would result in the attorneys disbarment if he sent the check to the sister knowing she was going to forge it. You are being lied to.

[–]allfort 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

As others have said, the problem is with your wife. Just start the divorce now and get this over with.

[–]DasSassyPantzen 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Believe what you want, but have you verified anything wife has told you?? I would start there.

[–]NotRickDeckard 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It seems like you're two-stepping around the huge, one-word question here: "Why?" That will at least begin to answer all subsequent questions, such as "do I need a divorce lawyer?"

[–]EatThisNotcat 109 ポイント110 ポイント  (47子コメント)

Anything over $10,000 gets a lot of scrutiny from a bank. I highly doubt she was able to deposit a $200,000 check by simply forging a signature. Also, had the check been cashed there would have been taxes involved and it absolutely would have been reported to IRS.

[–]SilverShibe 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I've deposited 4 checks over $25K and 2 over $200K since breakfast. None of this is true.

[–]westkms 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction: those checks were made out to an entity that matched the name on the bank account.

People keep saying the issue is the size of the check. And you're correct; that's not the reason there are problems with this story. It's that you can't walk into your bank with a check made out to someone else, slap their name on the back, and deposit it into your own account. If it's a relatively small amount, the bank will still want proof it has actually been signed over, whether power of attorney or even just a notarized statement. But for $200k, they aren't going to accept anything less than the wife proving her identity in person.

It's equally unlikely that the wife could just ask the settling party to make the check out to someone else. Why would they do that? There are several valid reasons they would refuse to do that.

It seems highly likely that the wife is still being dishonest about something. For instance, if she has a joint account with her sister, that's pretty important information on its own.

[–]SilverShibe 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Absolutely. My employer does tend to receive large checks made out incorrectly often, and even that has not been a problem. I would guess that has more to do with the size of the balance we hold with our bank though. They know they could recoup any incorrectly deposited checks. My post was meant to be a direct reply to EatThisNotcat's statements that anything over $10K gets a lot of scrutiny from banks or that there would be mandatory IRS reporting or taxes on a check that large.

[–]SkyFreighter 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And some banks refuse third party checks. Any reasonable bank wouldn't accept a $200,000 third party check.

[–]Jessie_James 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Anything over $10,000 gets a lot of scrutiny from a bank.

Not true. Anything over $10k in cash gets scrutinized for various anti drug and money laundering laws. Checks? Deposit all the money you want in check form.

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p1544/ar02.html

[–]Raveynfyre 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (39子コメント)

There are legal forms that have to be filled out and submitted to the government when any single transaction (or multiple in one day) is over $10k. I don't even know how the bank would just let you deposit that amount of money if your name isn't the one on the check.

[–]Jessie_James 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (7子コメント)

No, you're wrong. Forms only have to be filled out for CASH deposits over $10k, not checks.

https://www.irs.gov/publications/p1544/ar02.html

[–]kfrxsh 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (25子コメント)

The bank doesn't have to fill out a report if the deposit isn't in cash. However theres no way her sister could have deposited that check if both her & her sister were present at the time.

[–]Raveynfyre 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (24子コメント)

I've deposited small sum checks that were signed over with no difficulty. However, any transaction (including a deposit) over 10k requires a CTR. -sorry for mobile link-

I work as an analyst at a bank, and even though I'm not a consumer banking employee, I have to take a test on this shit every year.

[–]HelperBot_ 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_transaction_report

HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 60607

[–]Raveynfyre 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thank you HelperBot!

[–]the_mews 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I love a moment of genuine gratitude to a robot. Feels cozily dystopian, like there's hope for us yet to coexist.

[–]grasshoppercookie 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (3子コメント)

A CTR is only required for cash transactions, not checks.

[–]Raveynfyre -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The C in CTR is for "currency," not cash.

Here is the wiki on it.

[–]grasshoppercookie 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Quote from your wiki "used in this context currency means the coin and/or paper money of any country that is designated as legal tender by the country of issuance". The FinCEN CTR reference also explains CTR reporting is required for "cash or coin" transactions.

[–]HelperBot_ 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_transaction_report

HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 60651

[–]FLis4lovers 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You must fail every year then, because you are incorrect. CTR forms are for cash transactions only.

[–]kfrxsh 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Youre right, my mistake. Source : I was a personal Banker.

[–]too_many_skin_tags 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (13子コメント)

Is this something the bank or the customer fills out? I deposited some checks over 10k last fall and just gave them my DL.

[–]Masterjason13 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (12子コメント)

It's done by the bank, but as some have pointed out, it ONLY applies to cash, not checks.

[–]damaconz 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is incorrect and you should not spread misinformation like this if you don't know the law. The limits you're referring to are only if the transactions are done in cash. A check is not cash.

[–]SkyFreighter 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Checks are excellent documents, leaving a paper trail. Cash is 'blind' money, and therefore documents need to be filled out, especially post 9/11.

[–]gratty 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Nope. I used to practice personal injury law. We routinely deposited six figure checks without any paperwork except a deposit slip. Still do (just not as big or for PI claims).

[–]hatheaded 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Accident settlements are not taxable income. Source: had a large settlement, my attorney advised me it's not taxable income, as it is paid to compensate you for a loss, to make you whole again.

[–]snknsQuality Contributor 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Property of the married person, not marital property... except to the extent it is used to reimburse expended marital assets, right?

Just from an equity standpoint, if my wife gets injured in an accident and we pay $100k in medical bills, $10k on a handicapped ramp for the front door, and $40k from joint savings to meet expenses while she is out of work... I'm expecting $150k of any settlement money to be deemed a marital asset when it comes down to it.

I do unfortunately agree with the impending divorce theory. There is no other conceivable reason to have the check sent out of state to a third party.

[–]coolfusis 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Copying from my earlier reply:

There's also the possibility that the sister-in-law is in severe financial troubles, and OP's wife was trying to bail her out. There was a promise to pay back, which hasn't happened.

Also, there is the possibility that the sister-in-law is involved in some kind of pyramid scheme/scam and conned OP's wife into an "investment", promising that the money would be coming back in the form of dividends. OP's wife is embarrassed, and doesn't want to believe her sister scammed her. She may believe there's a chance of recovery.

The second option is more common than people think, unfortunately. Lots of people recurving windfalls get talked into scammy "investment" advice from family members. OP needs to talk to his wife and a lawyer. Not Reddit.

[–]whyworrynow 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

[I]f it was a medical or accident settlement, it would have been considered the property of the injured person, not marital property.

That is not necessarily the case in Indiana anymore per the ruling of In Re The Marriage of Edwards and Bonilla-Vega.

[–]derspinyQuality Contributor 549 ポイント550 ポイント  (22子コメント)

Assuming your headline is accurate and that your wife had no part in this:

Your wife can file a police report. Check fraud is a crime, and at six figures it's likely the police will pursue it. The check itself will be good evidence; if she can, she should contact her insurance company, and ask them to send her a copy of the cancelled check ASAP. If her sister faces charges, your wife can ask that restitution be included in the sentence.

She can also sue her sister. If her sister really has spent the money and it's gone, she may not ever be able to pay the judgement, but a civil judgement persists a long time if carefully tended, and can be used to do things like place liens on her property, seize her bank accounts (including joint accounts), and garnish her wages.

Finally, she can let her insurer know that the check has been stolen. They may take this up: it's their money she stole, right now, and they may still owe your sister the amount of the settlement. Her insurer will almost certainly go to the police if they get involved at all.

If your wife voluntarily gave her sister the money, then this is a purely civil matter. Your wife can sue for repayment if it was a loan that's now going unpaid. At six figures, that's well into "get a lawyer" territory.

You, however, have a relationship problem, not a legal problem.

[–]AKTourGirl 154 ポイント155 ポイント  (21子コメント)

When the check is sent and cashed by the incorrect party it becomes a fraud case for the issuer and they should have an obligation to pay the correct party. I would say OP should check on the specifics of this. It shouldn't matter that they know the check casher.

[–][deleted] 95 ポイント96 ポイント  (13子コメント)

Yeah, except OP conveniently left out the information from his /r/personalfinance post that got deleted. The wife lied for 6+ months about the check not even being sent. Something happened and that lie fell to tatters and she is now saying that the check was sent months ago directly to the sister at her behest.

[–]Caribbean_Queen_1985 54 ポイント55 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Who loans someone $200K? There IS more to this story on the wife's side. Plus, anything like this should have been discussed before between OP and Wife.

[–]Highside79 61 ポイント62 ポイント  (11子コメント)

The wife is hiding the money from her husband, probably to provide an escape plan.

[–]PAdogooder 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Or it's been spent. Gambling, drugs, etc.

[–]tlndfors 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (8子コメント)

A $33,000/month drug habit must look pretty amazing.

[–]PAdogooder 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I could blow 200k in a night.

[–]MileHighCard 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I want to party with you, man.

[–]tlndfors 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm tempted to get RES just so I can tag you "can blow $200K in a night on drugs" ...

[–]PAdogooder 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

And gambling.... but yeah, I could probably do it on drugs alone, but I'd need some preparation.

[–]greenbabyshit 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Roughly a thousand a day. I could hang for a week or two, but every day? Idk. My tolerance has grown over the years, but this is crazy even to me.

[–]VAPossum 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or to protect her sister. (Divorce is more likely.)

[–]macimom 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think that may be only if they are given notice fairly quickly -in this case the wife instructed the attorney to send the check to the sister-knowing sh would cash it and 'borrow' the money. The wife would be complicit in any fraud. There isn't any theft bc the wife had the check given to her sister.

Civil suit is the only thing that will work-you will have to gt a judgement then enforce it. If the husband make $100k a year you can ( and should) have his paycheck garnished until its paid off

[–]questionsfoyou -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

When the check is sent and cashed by the incorrect party it becomes a fraud case for the issuer and they should have an obligation to pay the correct party.

A check is a negotiable instrument. If the wife accepted it and then voluntarily gave it to her sister to be cashed, that's not necessarily fraud. The wife received compensation, and then used that compensation in the form of a negotiable instrument to pay someone else.

[–]AKTourGirl 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The check would have to be signed over to the sister though which would be the smoking gun here, that's how I see it at least but INAL.

[–]questionsfoyou 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It could be endorsed by the wife and handed over to the sister, or the wife could authorize the sister to sign it and deposit it on her behalf. Both would work.

[–]gratty 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I don't quite follow your logic here, but you seem to be saying that there's no fraud simply because the funds were paid by check instead of cash. That would be incorrect. Fraud isn't limited to cash. Anything of value can be the subject of fraud.

[–]auraseer 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

They're saying the question of fraud depends on who got the check first.

If the check is made out to Sally Smith, but Jane Smith is the one who actually receives it, and she pretends to be Sally when she goes to cash it, that's fraud. Jane has stolen the money by deception.

But if Sally herself receives the check, and then intentionally hands it over to Jane, that isn't fraud at all. Sally got paid just as she was supposed to. She can then hand over the money to her sister if she wants to.

[–]questionsfoyou 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm saying there's no fraud if it was authorized, and the fact that a check was used is irrelevant. Hence "If the wife accepted it and then voluntarily gave it to her sister to be cashed, that's not necessarily fraud." Or, if the wife authorized her sister to sign it and deposit it on her behalf, that's not fraud. The poster above me wrote

When the check is sent and cashed by the incorrect party it becomes a fraud case for the issuer and they should have an obligation to pay the correct party.

I'm saying that it's possible for the check to have been cashed by the "incorrect party" (the sister) and "the correct party" (the wife) to have been validly compensated by the issuer as long as the wife authorized it. Hence the part that a check is a negotiable instrument and can be transferred.

[–]EeechQuality Contributor 115 ポイント116 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You're getting answers kind of all over the map as it is critical for us to know why your wide had the check sent to her sister. People are all guessing at motivations - my take was is was a short term loan of all or part she was supposed to pay back bit didn't by the time you learned.

That's not a stolen check and not illegal. Its a bit odd that it would pass an audit for that amount for forgery, so there is a strong possibility that she signed papers with the attorney asking for the settlement to be sent in her sisters name.

We really need to know the facts your wife isn't telling you about why, but it is more likely a civil debt only and not a criminal act.

Her recourse is to sue her sister for am unpaid loan. This is way outside small claims territory so she will need an attorney. The first step is a demand letter and attempt to resolve without going to court before trying. She will have to show or explain the reason for having the money sent. Assuming a loan in default, she needs to show the terms. Testimony is evidence of this wasn't done in writing.

I have the misfortune of suing several times a year. I strongly advise doing so early on in default as the judgement allows you to seize things she owns get money from held accounts, even garnish wages or place liens on real property such as her house for 10 or more years and is very easy to renew.

She will likely come up with 200k judging by what you state her assets are when she finds the demand letter from the attorney. We write great letters explaining true possible consequences of losing a case.

Please encourage her to not think of this ad "but its family." All thieves have or had a family and she is not holding up what I assume was a loan for a bad plan. She can give her time to make payments, but don't let the SOL run out without suing for a legal judgement.

[–]Subwhoredinate 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (1子コメント)

In another thread posted elsewhere, OP admits that he showed his wife the comments that recommended calling police, and it was only at that time that wifey 'fessed up to having had the cheque sent to the sister.

OP, your wife is hiding large sums of money from you. Call a divorce lawyer, because you can bet she already has.

[–]lorelatte 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd be curious about what wifey's explanation was as to why she sent the check to the sis.

[–]Sjdjfh2uwhchc 111 ポイント112 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Expect a divorce soon.

[–]neuhmz 62 ポイント63 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I hate to say it man you need to prepare for a divorce, sounds like she is hiding assets already so you may want to start digging around a bit. Be careful mistakes here will cost a lot.

[–]cavemenareppl2 28 ポイント29 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sounds to me that it was hidden and not stolen. The whole chain of events Is just so illogical for someone that was not trying to hide it. If I were going to loan someone money, I'd write the check myself, not send an insurance settlement check.

I'd get your affairs in order OP and be the first to move. It sounds like a divorce is imminent.

[–]3moose1 90 ポイント91 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sorry about the divorce.

If it hasn't happened yet, I'm sorry for the spoiler alerts.

[–]BiondinaQuality Contributor[M] 50 ポイント51 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I should remove this, but it's too funny.

[–]Machismo01 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You gotta admit. Once you read it all, I think he is right. This wife is trying to hide and keep all 200,000. She sees the money as hers and her path to get out. Messed up.

[–]YouCantSaveEveryone 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is your wife known to hide 200k from you before ?

[–]SkyFreighter 36 ポイント37 ポイント  (15子コメント)

Your text doesn't make sense.

and sister forged (my wife's?) name and deposited it into her own account.

Context is missing. A check needs to be endorsed by the payee and deposited/cashed or signed over to a third party. So, are you saying:

Sister B forged a check written to sister A, and sister B signed the check over to herself?

[–]derspinyQuality Contributor 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (14子コメント)

My read is this:

  1. Insurer sends Wife a check for $200,000.
  2. Somehow, the check ends up in the possession of out-of-state Sister.
  3. Sister deposits the check, while telling Wife the check never arrived.
  4. Wife has now discovered that the check was cashed, and connected the dots.

You're right that, normally, a check needs to be endorsed by its payee before it can be cashed by a third party, but check clearing is largely automated. If that check wasn't one of the ones selected for verification, and neither the payer nor the intended payee noticed, it may well have been deposited by the wrong party without much complaint. I'm skeptical that Sister's bank accepted a check that large without verification, and of a few other details of OP's wife's story as told by OP, but you never know.

[–]nikapo 57 ポイント58 ポイント  (1子コメント)

See, my read was, wife had the check sent to her sister, sister cashed it, then wife kept telling OP she hadn't gotten the check. Then I'm assuming he kept pushing her about it and she finally admits her sister got the money but was supposed to pay her back before OP found out.

To me, OP's wife isn't being honest with him about her money and as a result the story he's telling isn't going to make much sense because it's probably not what really happened.

Either the sister stole the check and put into her own account without the bank noticing somehow, this was a loan the wife made to her sister, or the wife is diverting the money because she wants to leave and she's making up a story. OP isn't replying as of yet so who knows.

[–]SkyFreighter 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And there it is, the scenario I didn't consider. Payee KNEW the sister had the money. OP is blind to that fact. Maybe not now.

[–]Raveynfyre -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Anything over $10k (in one day) requires additional forms be filled out for the government. The bank is being extremely negligent if they just let this check through without that extra scrutiny. They could lose their charter with the FDIC if the case is exactly as stated above.

Editing to add the wiki on it, since some seem to believe it doesn't apply to deposits (untrue) or that it's for "cash" transactions only (also untrue). This is required for currency related transactions, of which paper checks written in a dollar amount are included.

[–]MelungeonQueen 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Anything over $10k (in one day) requires additional forms be filled out for the government.

That isn't true at all. I make over 10K a paycheck and it doesn't require extra forms. I transfer money between accounts and it doesn't require extra forms. It's only for cash deposits, or any transaction the bank deems suspicious.

[–]Danibelle903 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's not true. That's only for cash deposits.

The government wants to know where you're getting that much money from. If it's a check, they know exactly where it came from. If it's cash, you need to provide that information.

[–]shinyhairedzomby 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Maybe if you're trying to straight up cash the check immediately, I guess, but you certainly don't if you're just depositing a check. I've made numerous 30k+ check deposits for work and nobody blinked twice or did anything aside from making sure the check is endorsed and letting you know that the funds might be held for a few days until it clears.

[–]Snidgetless 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why is your wife hiding money from you? How's the marriage going? Any other funny business you're not paying attention to?

[–]BuboTitan 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (7子コメント)

I agree that this smells like a scheme to divert assets so they won't be shared later in a divorce.

And there is another huge issue too. Not sure where you live, but it's possible that either your wife or both of you (depending on if you file jointly) will have to pay income taxes on that settlement, a settlement that you didn't even get!

And if your wife's sister is really well off but claims she spent the money - another possibility is that she has some kind of drug or gambling problem that she's hiding from her husband. But it sounds like you are getting all your information second hand through your wife, and that might not be correct information. Have you tried directly speaking to your wife's sister? How about her husband? He should be aware what's going on. This concerns him too.

[–]peskyhumans 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Depends on the type of settlement. If, for example, the settlement is for a personal injury claim, as long as they didn't deduct the medical expenses then the settlement is nontaxable.

[–]ProTruth 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (4子コメント)

And there is another huge issue too. Not sure where you live, but it's possible that either your wife or both of you (depending on if you file jointly) will have to pay income taxes on that settlement, a settlement that you didn't even get!

OP should refuse to pay taxes on something he never acquired. If he still does pay for the settlement, than he is beyond our help.

Though, I agree something seems fishy here and I hate to post this for the OP to read as this would destroy my heart if anyone posted this crap saying "Expect a divorce" etc. Put yourself in the OPs shoes, and I hope nothing bad turns out.

[–]danweber 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

OP should refuse to pay taxes on something he never acquired.

Is this good legal advice? Does the IRS have a safe haven provision for this? You don't want to get in a fight with the IRS at the same time you are getting a divorce. . .

[–]LadyA052 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If it's a personal settlement, it's her money, not his. Not joint property.

[–]TastyFace 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You file separately and file a form that exists for this purpose. It allows an innocent spouse to protect their refund from the crime-related liabilities of a criminal spouse.

[–]Rayn211 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think they only would have to claim the settlement amount if they itemized medical expenses previously that were related to the settlement (which is very possible if she was seriously hurt)

[–]CallingYouOut2 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

OP, as someone who worked at a bank, no fucking way any bank accepted a $200k check from someone with third party endorsement without verifying the signature. If someone walked into a bank and handed a teller a $200k check, that check would require a manager's approval (no teller has a check authority that high). The manager would check the name on the check and the name on the account. If they don't match they're going to require a bunch of ID before they accept it for deposit. If it was endorsed by a third party they would require that person have a signature guarantee on a check that large. NO WAY in hell did the sister just forge a check and deposit it to her account. This was either deposited into a joint account with your wife OR your wife has colluded to hide the money.

[–]Hum_diddly_dick_kiss 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Alright OP a lot of people think you should prepare for divorce. I think this is one option. The other option is that unknown to you your wife borrowed a substantial amount of money from her sister for some reason and this is her paying her sister back. If she didn't tell you about borrowing the money I can see how it would be awkward to explain to you.

I think you need to sit down and really figure out what is going on. If the money was genuinely taken by the sister without your wife's permission then the police should be contacted. I would be very careful with how you approach this conversation, just because many Redditors scream divorce does not mean this is true.

We also don't know anything about you. For all we know you have a drug or gambling problem and it's best you don't have access to the money for your own good.

[–]Walterod 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Congratulations on the divorce!

http://godlessdoctrine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/louis-ck-1.png

Lawyer up!

[–]letuswatchtvinpeace 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is something very fishy going on here. How did you SIL deposit a 3rd party check for 200k? My brother is always sending his pay checks to my mom to deposit, into her account, and they have a hard time because they want both parties there to endorse it, his are not large checks.

[–]Dbaofdoom 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The sister didn't "spend" the money.

She's holding on to it until after the divorce, at which time she's probably been promised anywhere from 10-20%.

[–]Peedersukablyat 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lawyer up, lawyer up, lawyer up. Sorry about the divorce. Don't let this lady manipulate you any longer.

[–]Techjeffe 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

This is one strange story. First off, legal settlements, life insurance payouts and inheritances are separate property, to the best of my knowledge. Your wife could have just opened a separate account, cashed the check and it was hers. Now, if she had commingled the funds by depositing it into a joint account, that turns into a gray area and could be considered joint property in the marriage. She didn't have to do what she did to avoid sharing with you.

She just told me that her sister was supposed to pay her back before I found out about it.

As I see this, you have no recourse, since the settlement was your wife's separate property. Your wife may not either. It really sounds like a loan gone bad. Still, lots of red flags here.

Edit: I've deposited several large checks over my lifetime and believe me, the banks really scrutinize you as well as hold the funds for a short period of time before you get access- the last one was about ten days.

[–]freebluespike 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Unless her sister has few millions with that banks. I have yet heard about any teller or manager willing lose their jobs to accept 200k third party check, even both the sister and wife were in front of the counter

[–]gratty 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

legal settlements . . . are separate property, to the best of my knowledge.

That might depend on the nature of the claim. If the money is a replacement for income, like damages for employment discrimination, it might be considered marital property to the same extent the income itself would have been.

[–]SAD_FACED_CLOWN 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sounds like your wife and her sister "finessed you" as the kids say. You need to ask your wife more questions.

[–]lorelatte 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think the biggest question for OP is if it is possible his wife is divorcing him. Only he can answer this, but I think it helps give a ton of information about the backstory and what's really going on here.

Have things been rocky with your wife? Any recent major marital issues, with either of you at fault? It's not 100% of course, there is always a small possibility of being blindsided, but in general, couples often know when things have been downhill in a marriage.

[–]BaaBaaBlowSheep 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dude, lawyer-up if you think you're getting hoodwinked.

Also, get a gym membership and a Facebook account. You'll need it for Tinder and Bumble these days.

Being single is a whole different thing these days. Enjoy

[–]guruglue 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your wife trying to do things "before you find out about it" is the real issue here. You need relationship advice.

[–]visualspeak 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

She planning on leaving you and you just found out about it.

That's what it sounds like to me.

[–]SoFlaEstatePlanning 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah, you need more information. Was the money in the Attorney's IOTA trust account, and he sent it to the wrong person?

[–]nikapo -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

First sentence, op is referring to his wife:

I found out that she had the attorney send her sister the check six months ago.

[–]TotesMessenger 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]imanimpostor 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Please keep us updated OP!

[–]LocationBotTremendous! -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

http://imgur.com/a/myIAb

I am a bot whose sole purpose is to improve the timeliness and accuracy of responses in this subreddit.

It appears you forgot to include your location in the title or body of your post.

Please update the body of your original post to include this information.

Do NOT delete this post - Instead, simply edit the post with the requested information..

Report Inaccuracies Here | GitHub | Author | LocationBot Statistics (Not Mobile Friendly) | LocationBot v2.1.1

Original Post:

Author: /u/DustyCrist

My wife received a $200k settlement and her sister forged her name and deposited into her own account. They have a nice house, two brand new cars and her husband makes over $100k a year but she is telling my wife she has spent the money. Can anyone help me with my options.

I found out that she had the attorney send her sister the check six months ago. She had been telling me that the insurance company had just not sent the check yet. She just told me that her sister was supposed to pay her back before I found out about it. I don't know what to believe now, but I know for sure that she forged her name, she lives in another state.

[–]GatineauLol 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This thread has so much random speculations. The only thing you should be retaining from this thread is that we don't have enough information to help you.

People just love speculations and drama, almost like they've forgotten about the Boston Marathon crap.

[–]tomanonimos 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sounds like she has some serious trust issues with you or is preparing to divorce

[–]recipriversexcluson -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sister goes to jail.

Sister's family loses nice house and two brand new cars.