4 ms·

Could you be more specific please? Cause you said based on photographs. Otherwise national banks usually ask for more than half of the note. At least in that's

• ggm 5y ago
  Your point is clearer to me now. No, you can't literally recover money simply because you have a photograph of it. There is a recovery path for damaged and destroyed money, highly dependent on the serial number (which is why 50% of the note is typically requested) Here's the Australian rules after a significant bushfire. Partial re-imbursement for up to 80% loss of the face of the note. https://au.sports.yahoo.com/bushfires-burnt-your-cash-heres-what-to-do-003616395.html https://au.sports.yahoo.com/bushfires-burnt-your-cash-heres-... The point I was trying to make is that the actual value of the exchange is not only visible, its entirely visible. The specific value can be proved. If this was analogous in real world currency, Claim for loss would be possible.
  • dragonwriter 5y ago
    > There is a recovery path for damaged and destroyed money, highly dependent on the serial number (which is why 50% of the note is typically requested) No, >50% of the same bill or proof of destruction of the remainder is requested not because of serial number dependency (you can have that much without the serial number), but because with either of those, you can be sure that the same bill isn't replaced twice, or replaced but still usable.