Restrictive Endorsement

[SSH0126]

If I put this on the back of a cashiers check or money order and the CA cashes the check and does not remove the collection of the credit..Is there anything that can be truely done? I mean do they really have to remove it if they cash the check? 

The cashing of this check certifies that [name of CA] agrees to remove all reporting of this account from the 3 major credit bureaus (TU, EX, EQ) and any other credit reporting agencies they report to.

[Anonymous]

---

@SSH0126 wrote:

If I put this on the back of a cashiers check or money order and the CA cashes the check and does not remove the collection of the credit..Is there anything that can be truely done? I mean do they really have to remove it if they cash the check? 

The cashing of this check certifies that [name of CA] agrees to remove all reporting of this account from the 3 major credit bureaus (TU, EX, EQ) and any other credit reporting agencies they report to.

---

No. Restrictive endorsements hold no power to compel anyone to do anything.

[Anonymous]

The 1997 legislature abolished this procedure and went back to older law. ORS 73.0311 now reads as follows:

The negotiation of an instrument marked "paid in full," "payment in full," "full payment of a claim" or words of similar meaning, or the negotiation of an instrument accompanied by a statement containing such words or words of similar meaning, does not establish an accord and satisfaction that binds the payee or prevents the collection of any remaining amount owed upon the underlying obligation unless the payee personally, or by an officer or employee with actual authority to settle claims, agrees in writing to accept the amount stated in the instrument as full payment of the obligation.

These new rules apply to checks and other instruments tendered or negotiated after October 4, 1997.

(that's Oregon's version, but one can assume that everyone else has caught up with that one as well)

[SSH0126]

 basically its pointless and i can skip it. Just pfd or gw