this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
66 points (98.5% liked)

Canada

7577 readers
997 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] grte 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This seems to be the crux of the issue:

After CBC Toronto contacted TD this week, it offered to issue a new cheque with the condition George sign an indemnity agreement, which means he would be held liable for the money if the original cheque is ever found and cashed by someone else.

George says he declined, and instead offered to sign an agreement that says he'd be liable for $150,000. He says he isn't comfortable with the risk of having to repay the full amount. He also says he's done nothing wrong so shouldn't be the one on the hook.

So it seems that this offer has been made, but on the condition that if the original cheque is ever found and cashed Kavaratzis would be on the hook for it. Kavaratzis contends that that's not fair as he wasn't the one who lost the original.

[–] [email protected] 63 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Kavaratzis should not be liable.

If the original cheque is ever found, and someone else attempts to cash it, that would be fraud. Now that Kavaratzis has requested a new cheque, if the old one ever makes it to their possession and they attempt to cash it, that would also be fraud. We figured this out DECADES ago, that's why cheques have a holding period.

Whoever is cashing the cheque is responsible to make sure it clears before exchanging it for money, and the original cheque should be annulled so it cannot be cashed.

[–] Fifteen_Two 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Exactly. I do not understand why this is an issue at all.

[–] snoons 18 points 1 year ago

I do not understand why this is an issue at all.

TD having to do their job is the issue.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Right, this check is not a bearer bond, its made out to a singular person. There shouldn't be any issue here. It's not 1850 where it takes weeks to verify a check

[–] jadero 8 points 1 year ago

Nope, it's 2023, where people seem to have forgotten how cheques work.