Let me rephrase slightly....have we missed this?

there is no such thing as a bad valid question. i thought it was called Bank 21 Act, not check 21

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Check_21_Act

i see that, but a few years ago before it became implimented i had learned about it and at that time it was called, i had thought, bank 21 AND what it did was allow photocopies of cancelled cheques to be considered adequate to return to the account holder, that a scan can be transmitted & processed, and the original destroyed. i thought the clearing house could use them (the paper checks) in a wood stove to heat the building....

David, perhaps the reason the bank keeps the ORIGINAL for "monetizing" purposes and NOT for kindling (tender) for the wood stove?

Also, "Clearing Houses" do not use wood stoves to heat their buildings. They do, however; use "paper" for other purposes. :)

I don't think that is what they are doing with them David Johansen... ;-)

yah, i figured they came up with somthing better than burning them for heat. just wasnt thinking about it that deep...

seems like not negotiable may be required to add to them...

I am THE ADMINISTRATOR, and THAT is NON NEGOTIABLE.

Sigh....why in the fuck would you do that?

why would that be negotiable? except to let them just have it all back? unless ofcourse if your thinking if they wanted to administrate then they can take whole responsibility from the man, they took it back, so let them have it?