So this is pretty funny. Forum

[romothesavior]

No, they can't. He doesn't technically owe them money. All they can do is revoke his seat.

I dunno, I seem to remember my despot saying it was non refunable. I know when someone gives me a depsoit to rent one of my places I hold that deposit until they move in, and deducting from thier total move in costs. but by leaving a depsot they are agreeing to rent my place and I'm agreeing to hold it for them and not rent it out to anyone else. If they later change thier mind, and decide not to rent my place, then as the recipt i gave them says, theat depsoit is do in consideration of me taking the unit off the market and holding it for them. I don't see a seat deposit being that diffrent. Until he telles them he is not attending they can not give that seat to someone esle. Once he does tell them that, then if the depsot was non refunadble given in cosnideration of saving hima seat they are owned that money. If the aparment depsot check bounces I'm reporting it to the crdit buerue, not becuase I really need that $100 or whatever, but becuase that's how I and other landlords, running thier credit, know if someone as ripped us off or woes rent or a depsoit to anuther landlord and thus is not a good credit risk.

+1. I dunno how everyone is arguing he can get that money back. But maybe I'm not up to speed on checking/deposit policies.

Did you see the part where the school didn't cash the check? People are saying he should have put a stop on the check before they found it.

No, I did not miss that part. But did you miss the part where kalvano said to still void it? That's ain't gonna happen, and I also think its unethical. This conversation is not about what he should have done in the past; people are still telling him to stop payment on the check.

I'm giving my landlord a check for a security deposit that won't be cashed until August. That check does two things: 1) serves as a security deposity in case I f*ck up my apartment while I live there, but 2) it also secures my spot for that apartment. If I change my mind and don't live there, you can bet your ass she's gonna cash it if she can't find somebody to live there in time. And I shouldn't be allowed to stop payment on it because I made an agreement when I gave her that check, just like OP did when he sent in his seat deposit.

[Iconoclast]

I didn't find anything funny about the OP's story. Matthies's contribution was fucking brilliant, but other than that, big pile o' fail.

A Matthies post is always full of win. I think I'm going to have to start iStalking (TM) him.

[thecilent]

this defff ftw

The school cashed it well before he ever sent the email. Probably a couple days.

For it to have happened like the OP said, this would have had to happen:

1. Someone read his email as soon as it came in. (Does anyone who has been through the admissions process believe that emails are read instantaneously?)
2. They rushed straight to the bank to deposit it! (This is usually done once a day, at the close of business.)
3. Then the bank used by the school would have had to process the check and send it to the OP's bank for processing. (Faster now that it is done electronically, but the transactions are still usually processed in batches at scheduled times of day.)
4. Then the OP's bank would have had to process the check and update the OP's "client side" transaction list. (Again, usually a delay of at least a couple hours)

The fact that it showed up in the OP's transaction history shortly after the email was sent is a coincidence.

And trying to cancel the check would be a scumbag move in the first place. The OP paid the school for a service (holding a seat). The school delivered the service. The OP changing his mind and no longer wanting the seat doesn't matter. He paid them to hold it and they did.

[d34d9823]

No, I did not miss that part. But did you miss the part where kalvano said to still void it? That's ain't gonna happen, and I also think its unethical. This conversation is not about what he should have done in the past; people are still telling him to stop payment on the check.

Here's what happened in the thread. When it was first posted, people were like "quick, put a stop on it" on the assumption that it hadn't cleared his bank yet. No one is saying that he should try to stop payment on a check that has already cleared.

I'm not sure whether that's your understanding or not, your quote here is ambiguous on that point.

[A'nold]

Eh. Sending a deposit in is not the same as "reserving a seat." This is for your benefit to prevent them from not allowing you to attend and a benefit for them in that they get your money. I think the money is the consideration here, not the promise to pay money. I know a promise can be consideration, but dude did not actually get anything, just kind of an insurance policy that his spot would not be taken away that he could point to and say "see, I sent you a deposit that you have not cashed." I think the school must actually cash the check for the contract to be complete and dude could rescind before they cash it.

Of course, I see the other side here too. There is a provision in the whole offer and acceptance in the restatement and UCC that deals with sending offers and accepting offers.

ISSUE: Was there a valid offer?

Rule: According to UCC blah

Here, OP.......

[romothesavior]

No, I did not miss that part. But did you miss the part where kalvano said to still void it? That's ain't gonna happen, and I also think its unethical. This conversation is not about what he should have done in the past; people are still telling him to stop payment on the check.

Here's what happened in the thread. When it was first posted, people were like "quick, put a stop on it" on the assumption that it hadn't cleared his bank yet. No one is saying that he should try to stop payment on a check that has already cleared.

I'm not sure whether that's your understanding or not, your quote here is ambiguous on that point.

Alright... well in any case, what's done is done and OP is outta luck. I'm guessing the school in question is Fordham, right OP?

[trialjunky]

No, I did not miss that part. But did you miss the part where kalvano said to still void it? That's ain't gonna happen, and I also think its unethical. This conversation is not about what he should have done in the past; people are still telling him to stop payment on the check.

I'm giving my landlord a check for a security deposit that won't be cashed until August. That check does two things: 1) serves as a security deposity in case I f*ck up my apartment while I live there, but 2) it also secures my spot for that apartment. If I change my mind and don't live there, you can bet your ass she's gonna cash it if she can't find somebody to live there in time. And I shouldn't be allowed to stop payment on it because I made an agreement when I gave her that check, just like OP did when he sent in his seat deposit.

Plus, dont admissions offices speak to one another...what if this gets back to the school he's intends to go to. I dont think its a big enough issue where they'll rescind his admission but it would def. taint their view on him. You want to start law school with a fresh slate. You dont want your reputation to proceed you.

[Matthies]

Eh. Sending a deposit in is not the same as "reserving a seat." This is for your benefit to prevent them from not allowing you to attend and a benefit for them in that they get your money. I think the money is the consideration here, not the promise to pay money. I know a promise can be consideration, but dude did not actually get anything, just kind of an insurance policy that his spot would not be taken away that he could point to and say "see, I sent you a deposit that you have not cashed." I think the school must actually cash the check for the contract to be complete and dude could rescind before they cash it.

Of course, I see the other side here too. There is a provision in the whole offer and acceptance in the restatement and UCC that deals with sending offers and accepting offers.

ISSUE: Was there a valid offer?

Rule: According to UCC blah

Here, OP.......

Dammint here come the new 2Ls I told you this would happen...who wants to argue benfit of the bargin or prossoiry stapolle?

[Bronte]

Eh. Sending a deposit in is not the same as "reserving a seat." This is for your benefit to prevent them from not allowing you to attend and a benefit for them in that they get your money. I think the money is the consideration here, not the promise to pay money. I know a promise can be consideration, but dude did not actually get anything, just kind of an insurance policy that his spot would not be taken away that he could point to and say "see, I sent you a deposit that you have not cashed." I think the school must actually cash the check for the contract to be complete and dude could rescind before they cash it.

Of course, I see the other side here too. There is a provision in the whole offer and acceptance in the restatement and UCC that deals with sending offers and accepting offers.

ISSUE: Was there a valid offer?

Rule: According to UCC blah

Here, OP.......

"Dude did not get anything." That's where you're wrong. He received the right to a seat. Like you said, it's comparable to an insurance policy or a stock option. Let's say you pay someone $100 today to protect you against fire for the next year. You don't get to say, three months later: "Oh, well, there was no fire. So I guess I'll take my money back." No, you got your end of the bargain: a quarter year's protection. Canceling payment is clearly a breach of contract on an ethical level.