Are Checks Sent Through the Mail Vulnerable to Theft?
10 183The New York Times tells the story of a 63-year-old retiree who wrote a check for several thousand dollaras to pay her taxes. But she discovered much later that her taxes were never paid because that check had been intercepted and then altered to be payable to someone else: In some cases, thieves may pilfer one or more checks from local mailboxes. Adam Rust, director of financial services for the Consumer Federation of America, said thieves sometimes "fish" for checks at free-standing drop boxes, using long tools with sticky pads on the ends to grab letters. In other cases, more sophisticated criminals may steal large batches of checks, copy them and then sell them on the internet. Often, the purloined checks are chemically altered in what's known as "check washing" to remove the name of the recipient. The thief replaces it with a fraudulent name, and often increases the amount of the check, before cashing or depositing it.
The 63-year-old retiree's bank told her she'd waited too long to recover the funds: Schwab's "security guarantee," outlined on its website , says that "Schwab will cover losses in any of your Schwab accounts due to unauthorized activity." But fine print at the bottom of the page notes that reimbursement "requires your timely reporting of unauthorized activity to Schwab," and that Schwab "will not be liable for additional or increased losses resulting from a failure to report unauthorized activity in a timely manner." It notes that more details are available in account agreements... Notify your bank as soon as possible, said Scott Anchin, senior vice president of strategic initiatives and policy at the independent bankers association. Banks generally allow at least 30 days and sometimes up to 90 days from the time your statement is made available to you to report suspected check fraud, he said.
So how can you avoid check fraud? Adam Rust, director of financial services for the Consumer Federation of America, just suggests that "No one should ever mail a check." If you must write a check, he said, try to deliver it in person or take it inside a post office to mail rather than relying on your own mailbox or public drop boxes. The American Bankers Association recommends using permanent "gel" ink pens when you do write checks to reduce the risk of tampering... And if you don't already, consider using your bank's online bill payment service.
The article notes that even the U.S. federal government "has been moving away from paper checks for things like benefit payments and income tax refunds, saying digital payment methods are more secure."
10 comments
Really? (Score: 5, Interesting)
by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @03:35PM (#66214432)
By 2026, mobile money in sub-Saharan Africa has processed hundreds of billions of dollars annually across dozens of countries. Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Ghana, Senegal, Côte d'Ivoire, all have thriving mobile money ecosystems where a market trader, a farmer, a domestic worker, anyone with a $15 phone can send and receive money instantly, securely, with a transaction record, no check, no bank, no signature, no piece of paper traveling through an unlocked box.
The richest country on earth, with the most sophisticated banking system, the most advanced technology companies, and essentially universal internet access, is still moving money by writing account details on paper, signing it, putting it in an envelope, dropping it in an unlocked metal box, waiting for a government employee to physically transport it, having it scanned at a processing centre, and clearing it through a multi-day settlement system.
A Kenyan goat farmer with a Nokia from 2009 completes the same transaction in four seconds.
reduced payment methods is loss of freedom (Score: 5, Insightful)
by will4 ( 7250692 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @06:27PM (#66214652)
If we lose a method of paying for something, there is a loss of freedom.
Importantly, there is a loss of decades of pre-internet, pre-finance tech laws and court cases which protect the parties and individual citizens using that form of payment.
Forcing everyone to move to a "more convenient" form of payment lets the financial top 1% rewrite the laws and regulations to benefit them at the expense of a loss of freedom and protection for average citizens.
Removing the forms of payment lets big banks, the federal and state government, regulators, hedge funds, wall street, private equity and global NGOs get closer to tracking and having the power to "veto" any payment which disagrees with the politics, agenda or lobbyist favorites of the 1% and financial firms.
There are decades of VISA and Mastercard credit card payment systems allowing and profiting from credit card purchases at certain types of stores, and now that it is convenient and fits a political agenda, they cut off those stores from accepting VISA or Matercard credit card purchases.
We do not want a loss of freedom where every purchase is tracked, has a micro-tax/fee added to it, is used to profile the sell and buyer and to feed into a larger mass watching of each person.
It someone says "more-convenient" the first question should be "Who profits from this?" and the second should be "Which loss of freedom is this?".
And, when there is a natural disaster, electronic hack, or loss of freedom due to a military invasion of a country, how will people purchase food and water?
Re: Really? (Score: 5, Informative)
by shilly ( 142940 ) on Monday June 29, 2026 @01:00AM (#66215016)
This is just ridiculous cope. The UK has this, with a population of 70m, as does Germany with a population of 84m, and France with a population of 70m. It's nothing to do with size, or any other random factor you can think of. The UK's banking system is much older than the US's, and yet has managed to drag itself into the era of instant free electronic payments.
US bank account (Score: 5, Informative)
by innocent_white_lamb ( 151825 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @03:57PM (#66214460)
I'm not in or from the USA but I have a bank account at a US bank for the purpose of paying US based suppliers.
I interact with that account through the bank's website and can transfer money directly to it from my main bank account and make payments from that account through their website.
When I initially set up the account I assumed that those payments would be some kind of an electronic funds transfer.
Nope.
You enter the mailing address for each payee, and they print and mail a physical cheque to them from the bank.
Really.
Everything about the transaction is through their website right up to the point that they print and mail a cheque. And I still find that amazing.
Unfortunately (Score: 5, Insightful)
by sphealey ( 2855 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @03:58PM (#66214462)
That was the neighborhood advice going around our area 1-2 years ago. I myself was skeptical that mail theft was going on as I had dealt with the Postal Police when managing an e-commerce site and I knew they are very good at finding things like this. Unfortunately it turned out (1) I was wrong: there was mail theft going on in our neighborhood but (2) everyone else was wrong too: the mail wasn't being stolen from blue boxes; it was being lifted from the bins behind the slot in our postal service center. The perps were eventually caught but it took far longer than I would have thought.
Re:Yes. (Score: 5, Funny)
by know-nothing cunt ( 6546228 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @04:31PM (#66214510)
Betteridge just shit his pants.
Re:Checks? Yes. Just don't do it. (Score: 5, Insightful)
by innocent_white_lamb ( 151825 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @04:00PM (#66214468)
It's my understanding that there's almost no ballot fraud happening at all through any means.
At least nobody has ever shown any actual evidence that it's a significant or consequential issue.
Re:Checks? Yes. Just don't do it. (Score: 5, Informative)
by battingly ( 5065477 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @05:23PM (#66214588)
Almost all ballot fraud happens through the mail.
Almost all misinformation about ballot fraud happens when republicans are trying to disenfranchise voters. Registered democrats outnumber registered republicans in this country, so preventing people from voting is a key strategy of the GOP.
Re:Checks? Yes. Just don't do it. (Score: 5, Informative)
by stabiesoft ( 733417 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @05:29PM (#66214598)
And of course very quietly, the R's tell their people to vote by mail. Because it helps guarantee turnout. With a mail in, you vote ahead. R's don't like early voting much either, except for their people. The R's have refined disenfranchisement of non-R voters to a fine art.
Re:Checks? Yes. Just don't do it. (Score: 5, Informative)
by maladroit ( 71511 ) on Sunday June 28, 2026 @09:19PM (#66214834)
The Republicans and the Trump administration are the ones working to disenfranchise voters right now.
They are demanding state voting lists so that they can target the areas where there are more Democrats.
And there's this blatant plan to have the USPS block mail-in ballots in some situations:
https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]