Jump to Content
ABA: The American Bankers Association
Skip Section Navigation

Does Regulation CC apply to mobile remote deposit capture and to commercial remote deposit capture?

I have a question about the remote deposit capture provisions of revised Regulation CC. Under revised §229.34(f), a depositary bank that receives a remotely deposited check generally indemnifies a second depositary bank that has accepted the original paper check. However, the bank accepting the paper check is not protected if the original paper check has a restrictive endorsement consistent with the means of deposit, e.g., "for mobile deposit only to XYZ Bank."

My bank contacted a vendor inquiring about the endorsement capabilities of scanners to ensure that its commercial customers apply the restrictive endorsement when using remote deposit capture. The vendor responded that Regulation CC only applies to mobile remote deposit capture: it does not apply to commercial remote deposit capture.

My understanding is that this provision applies to any type of remote deposit capture (including non-mobile) and that Regulation CC applies not only to consumer accounts, but also to business deposit accounts. Thus, a bank should review remote deposit capture (including non-mobile remote deposit capture) agreements with businesses and consider adding a requirement to include a restrictive endorsement to protect the bank and limit its potential liability. Am I correct, or does this provision only apply to mobile deposits?

You are correct. Section 229.34(f), as amended, spells out the new indemnity provisions for duplicate deposits involving remote deposit capture. It does not differentiate between mobile and non-mobile remote deposit capture or between business and consumer customers. Thus, technically, to protect itself, the bank might want to require the restrictive endorsement. However, as a practical matter, this may not be necessary.

The practice of depositing a check using remote deposit capture and then cashing it elsewhere (e.g., at a check casher) is typically associated with consumer accounts. It would be unusual and risky for business customers, who are subject to stricter due diligence, to be deliberately depositing checks electronically and then cashing those checks elsewhere. Indeed, such fraudulent customers pose risks to the bank beyond any Regulation CC claim. Thus, it will not make a huge amount of difference for business accounts – as they are unlikely to be the ones to deposit checks and then cash them elsewhere.It is also worth noting that the restrictive endorsement protects the bank in the event its customer deposited the check using remote deposit capture and then cashed the check elsewhere. However, it is not required. It is still up to the bank whether it wants to require an endorsement or not. (December 2018)

Compliance Hotline

Have a compliance-related question? We're here to help. Members, reach us by phone or email.