4 ms·
As soon as there were multiple boxes with the same number in a single vault, this course of events was pretty much inevitable. If the bank is not competent eno
by tacostakohashi 7y ago
As soon as there were multiple boxes with the same number in a single vault, this course of events was pretty much inevitable.
If the bank is not competent enough to assign unique numbers to each box in the first place, of course they aren't going to be competent enough to only ever empty the correct one of several boxes numbered #105, or to handle to contents safely.
It's difficult to comprehend how the bank thought having non-unique numbers would be workable. If non-unique deposit box numbers seems ok, why not non-unique bank account numbers? Or why even go up to #105, just number them all #1?
I'm always fascinated when people find a way to undermine a simple, workable system and end up with something worse than no system, or the state of affairs before the system existed.
- amichal 7y agoI learned the hard way several years ago that a bank I used to have will happily cash two checks with the same check number the same amount and the the same recipient (on the same day even). Apparently check numbers are for my convenience not for any sort of auditing on their part.
- muzika 7y agoI had this happen once too, and was shocked that bank allowed same check to be deposited twice.
- dreamcompiler 7y agoLikewise signatures. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4344941 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4344941
- clintonb 7y agoThis is correct. When you order checks you decide The start number. Check processing is quite interesting. Banks can either be very lax or very restrictive in what checks they will accept.