OLD NSF check question

[alleycat1975]

So to shorten a long story.  Back in 2005, (jan 21,2005) I wrote a check to a man for animal feed on behalf of my then landlord  in leu of a payment for a livestock trailer that i was buying from them.  I was making payments on this trailer and they didn't have the funds to pay this guy at the time so i issued the payment myself.  Unfortunately, the check came back NSF.   Subsequently, the owners of the trailer decided to just sell it on ebay--they decided they needed the money faster than what i was paying and we just had an oral contract anyway.  I hadn't paid too much anyway and since they were my landlords also there wasn't a whole lot I could actually do at the time.   We moved in 2006 and didnt part on very good terms needless to say.

That said fast forward to now, i get a letter in the mail from the guy  the check was written to (he found me on facebook lol go figure) wanting his money.   Now.. my conundrum.   Ohio SOL is 3 years on dishonored checks.  6 years on regular collections if i'm not mistaken.    So obviously the SOL is past.   I'm in a position where I could concevably pay the guy but I have a hard time justifying paying the man when the whole reason I paid was because of this trailer transaction. 

Does anyone know, if i sent him any money at all does that reset SOL?   Should i just send him a copy of the statute naming the SOL and tell him to take it up with the former landlords?    Or just leave it be?

I'm half afraid this guy is going to go skipping thru the countryside saying I bounced a check and never made good on it  etc..  of course i live on the opposide side of the state now so it really wouldn't affect me TOO much.

Opinions?

[Anonymous]

I would ignore him!!! paying any amt would restart sol.. if you do talk to him, call him, dont give him any info in writing! tell him the check was for a trailor that you never received, so he has no basis to sue or demand money from you..  sounds like he might be on hard times and trying to get any money he can..

[Anonymous]

---

@alleycat1975 wrote:

So to shorten a long story.  Back in 2005, (jan 21,2005) I wrote a check to a man for animal feed on behalf of my then landlord  in leu of a payment for a livestock trailer that i was buying from them.  I was making payments on this trailer and they didn't have the funds to pay this guy at the time so i issued the payment myself.  Unfortunately, the check came back NSF.   Subsequently, the owners of the trailer decided to just sell it on ebay--they decided they needed the money faster than what i was paying and we just had an oral contract anyway.  I hadn't paid too much anyway and since they were my landlords also there wasn't a whole lot I could actually do at the time.   We moved in 2006 and didnt part on very good terms needless to say.

That said fast forward to now, i get a letter in the mail from the guy  the check was written to (he found me on facebook lol go figure) wanting his money.   Now.. my conundrum.   Ohio SOL is 3 years on dishonored checks.  6 years on regular collections if i'm not mistaken.    So obviously the SOL is past.   I'm in a position where I could concevably pay the guy but I have a hard time justifying paying the man when the whole reason I paid was because of this trailer transaction. 

Does anyone know, if i sent him any money at all does that reset SOL?   Should i just send him a copy of the statute naming the SOL and tell him to take it up with the former landlords?    Or just leave it be?

I'm half afraid this guy is going to go skipping thru the countryside saying I bounced a check and never made good on it  etc..  of course i live on the opposide side of the state now so it really wouldn't affect me TOO much.

Opinions?

---

The SOL on checks refers to criminal prosecutions, most likely.  The SOL upon the debt created by the bounced check should run for at least 6 years and you still have about a week or two to go on that.  If, however, a bad check is considered a written contract, the SOL can be as long as 15 years in Ohio.

In not every state does making a payment reset the SOL, but in Ohio I think it does.

[Walt_K]

Did you receive the feed?  If I understand you, you were making a payment to this guy on behalf of your landlord who had received feed from him.  So it would be your landlord that owes him mony, no?  Why would you owe the guy money?

Is he trying to recover the whole amount from you or just an NSF fee?  I suppose I could see if his bank charged him a fee for presenting a check that didn't clear him wanting that money from you, but just because you offered to make a payment on behalf of your landlord, I don't think that means you accepted liability for the payment to him.  For example, if I write a check for one of your utility bills because I owe you money and the check bounces, I don't think the utility company can come after me for your bill. 

[Anonymous]

---

@Walt_K wrote:

Did you receive the feed?  If I understand you, you were making a payment to this guy on behalf of your landlord who had received feed from him.  So it would be your landlord that owes him mony, no?  Why would you owe the guy money?

Is he trying to recover the whole amount from you or just an NSF fee?  I suppose I could see if his bank charged him a fee for presenting a check that didn't clear him wanting that money from you, but just because you offered to make a payment on behalf of your landlord, I don't think that means you accepted liability for the payment to him.  For example, if I write a check for one of your utility bills because I owe you money and the check bounces, I don't think the utility company can come after me for your bill. 

---

Bad analysis.

You write the check, you assume the obligation.  Whatever arrangement OP had with his landlord is largely irrelevant to the issue he has with the holder of the bad check.

In your scenario of the utility bill, not only can the utility company have you criminally prosecuted for writing a bad check, they also have civil recourse against you.   

[alleycat1975]

Here is the language from Ohio Revised code which addresses NSF checks:

(C) Except as provided in division (D) of this section, an action to enforce the obligation of a party to an unaccepted draft to pay the draft shall be brought within three years after dishonor of the draft or ten years after the date of the draft, whichever period expires first.

(D) An action to enforce the obligation of the acceptor of a certified check or the issuer of a teller’s check, cashier’s check, or traveler’s check shall be brought within three years after demand for payment is made to the acceptor or issuer.

the link to the full text is found here:  ORC 1303.16

As far as I know this accounts for both criminally and in civil cases.  I'll have to dig some more.   But this tells me that he had 3 years to collect and can now just bugger off.  I don't see in here where it would say paying it would restart the SOL but frankly, situation that it was, while i feel guilty about this in some respects, i'm just not in a position to deal with it and have to worry about a new SOL and all that all over again.

Now, would I have any right against him if he starts contacting everyone i know and telling them "hey she wrote me a bad check in 2005"?   because i can totally see this dude pulling that sort of stunt.

Thanks for all the advice! 

[Walt_K]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Bad analysis.

You write the check, you assume the obligation.  Whatever arrangement OP had with his landlord is largely irrelevant to the issue he has with the holder of the bad check.

In your scenario of the utility bill, not only can the utility company have you criminally prosecuted for writing a bad check, they also have civil recourse against you.   

---

You may be correct that writing a check somehow operates as an automatic assumption of the underlying liability at law.  I find that odd, but it's been quite a few years since I took contracts, and I don't know the laws around checks.  But for criminal prosecution, don't you have to be presenting the check for goods or services received?  Offering to pay someone else's obligation doesn't seem like it could support a criminal charge.  Again, just my off the cuff reaction, you may be correct.

[Anonymous]

---

@alleycat1975 wrote:

Here is the language from Ohio Revised code which addresses NSF checks:

(C) Except as provided in division (D) of this section, an action to enforce the obligation of a party to an unaccepted draft to pay the draft shall be brought within three years after dishonor of the draft or ten years after the date of the draft, whichever period expires first.

(D) An action to enforce the obligation of the acceptor of a certified check or the issuer of a teller’s check, cashier’s check, or traveler’s check shall be brought within three years after demand for payment is made to the acceptor or issuer.

the link to the full text is found here:  ORC 1303.16

As far as I know this accounts for both criminally and in civil cases.  I'll have to dig some more.   But this tells me that he had 3 years to collect and can now just bugger off.  I don't see in here where it would say paying it would restart the SOL but frankly, situation that it was, while i feel guilty about this in some respects, i'm just not in a position to deal with it and have to worry about a new SOL and all that all over again.

Now, would I have any right against him if he starts contacting everyone i know and telling them "hey she wrote me a bad check in 2005"?   because i can totally see this dude pulling that sort of stunt.

Thanks for all the advice! 

---

Zero recourse.

Truth is always an affirmative defense to any action for slander / libel.

[alleycat1975]

"You may be correct that writing a check somehow operates as an automatic assumption of the underlying liability at law.  I find that odd, but it's been quite a few years since I took contracts, and I don't know the laws around checks.  But for criminal prosecution, don't you have to be presenting the check for goods or services received?  Offering to pay someone else's obligation doesn't seem like it could support a criminal charge.  Again, just my off the cuff reaction, you may be correct."

At this point in time I wouldn't have any proof of those old transactions anyway.  He could just as easily say, i delivered feed for her and here's the check she used to pay.  Any proof i have of what the original intent was is long gone.  We moved from this place in 2006 after all.  Everything I'm reading is telling me SOL is 3 years on a dishonored check.  6 years for other collections.   But no where can i find that by accepting a check it constitutes a contract etc...  I haven't found any designation between criminal or civil SOL in this sort of issue either.  Everything refers me back to the SOL statute that I've already found. At most the charge is a misdemeanor anyway.  I'll keep looking.

[Anonymous]

---

@Walt_K wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Bad analysis.

You write the check, you assume the obligation.  Whatever arrangement OP had with his landlord is largely irrelevant to the issue he has with the holder of the bad check.

In your scenario of the utility bill, not only can the utility company have you criminally prosecuted for writing a bad check, they also have civil recourse against you.   

---

You may be correct that writing a check somehow operates as an automatic assumption of the underlying liability at law.  I find that odd, but it's been quite a few years since I took contracts, and I don't know the laws around checks.  But for criminal prosecution, don't you have to be presenting the check for goods or services received?  Offering to pay someone else's obligation doesn't seem like it could support a criminal charge.  Again, just my off the cuff reaction, you may be correct.

---

Criminal law: Present consideration:  Whether or not the writer of the check ultimately received the goods or services is irrelevant.  You go to the store with your spouse and you pay with a check that ultimately gets returned NSF.  You are the purchaser and because you ultimately gave the goods to someone else does not bar criminal prosecution. 

Contract law:  All the elements of a valid contract are present:

1.  Meeting of the Minds

2.  Offer & Acceptance

3.  Mutual Consideration

4.  Performance or Delivery

5.  Good Faith

6.  No Violation of Public Policy

You tender an unconditional promise to pay for value received.  In the scenario presented, that is exactly what happened.  A check was tendered in payment of goods.  These goods were then given to another in return for rent. 

Even if you missed Penal Law & also Contract Law, logic would also come into play.