Lost Checks - No Payee - Best Practice

[Milton Stern]

You all make good points.

I was just thinking that a duplicate check NUMBER entry (Description: "Lost
Check" vs "whatever the fraudulent check description may be") would be more
obvious, and less likely overlooked, than a "non-entry" vs "whatever the
fraudulent check description may be".  - Especially with the bank register
import methods available (new, match and overwrite, or match and don't
overwrite).

A "Lost Check" account would work. May I ask if it would be inappropriate
to match with the "Orphan" account?
I'm not clear on the "Orphan" usage.


On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Buddha Buck <blaisepascal at gmail.com> wrote:

> What is your current procedure to prevent or detect fraudulent checks
> written to that account?
>
> A fraudulent check is going to show up as a discrepancy between
> transactions you have recorded in your books and transactions recorded by
> the bank, and will be caught when those records are compared (either to
> check for cleared transactions, or for periodic account reconciliation).
>
> If the bank is reporting that it cashed checks numbered 8054, 8062,
> 8055,8060, and 8051, but you only have ledger entries for checks up to
> 8061, you are going to look into the 8062 check and find out why it isn't
> in your records. It may be fraudulent, it may be valid, but not properly
> recorded, etc.
>
> If the discrepancy was with a check far from the current number series
> (like from the box is wayward checks, or completely random) it would still
> show up as a discrepancy to the tracked down.
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:11 PM Milton Stern <drmoshe5 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As you suggested, I was considering not recording the checks at all.
>> But, I thought that the registers would be an good way of tracking if the
>> missing checks are ever used fraudulently?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Buddha Buck <blaisepascal at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In that case, I would not record them in GnuCash at all. There are no
>>> transactions involving them.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:48 PM Milton Stern <drmoshe5 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My apologies for not being clear.
>>>>
>>>> A box of blank checks were ordered from a bank.
>>>>
>>>> Box of check was never received.
>>>>
>>>> Checks have no payee and no amount.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Michael Hendry <
>>>> hendry.michael at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > > On 1 Jun 2015, at 23:50, Milton Stern <drmoshe5 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Ordered Checks lost in transit from Bank to Bank Account Holder.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Anyone have a good methodologies for documenting these checks (ie
>>>> > > "Transfer" field, documentation of lost checks)
>>>> >
>>>> > I’m not sure what you mean by “Ordered Checks”, but will assume that
>>>> you
>>>> > didn’t issue them yourself, but asked the bank to print them for you,
>>>> and
>>>> > to send them to the respective payees (or their banks).
>>>> >
>>>> > The usual rule for a check which you’ve issued but which has never
>>>> been
>>>> > cashed is to record the issue of the check in the normal way, and
>>>> then to
>>>> > record a reversing transaction for the date on which you decide that
>>>> the
>>>> > check has been lost or destroyed.
>>>> >
>>>> > This way, it’s quite clear what has happened. (Presumably the bank
>>>> will
>>>> > have recorded corresponding transactions?).
>>>> >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Transfer field will not accept blank entry. Transfer to same account
>>>> > > produces 2 entries -> messy.
>>>> >
>>>> > But essential to keep a clear record, in my view.
>>>> >
>>>> > > Should the "Orphan" Account be used?
>>>> >
>>>> > No.
>>>> >
>>>> > > Should it be set to "Void" after completion?
>>>> >
>>>> > I’d be inclined to leave both transactions in place.
>>>> >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Is there a way to enter a range of check numbers all at once?
>>>> >
>>>> > No, but once you’ve entered the first check’s details, you can use
>>>> the +
>>>> > key to increment the check numbers as you work your way through the
>>>> list of
>>>> > checks.
>>>> >
>>>> > Hope this helps.
>>>> >
>>>> > Michael
>>>> > (NOT AN ACCOUNTANT)
>>>> >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Suggestions appreciated.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Moshe
>>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>>> > > gnucash-user mailing list
>>>> > > gnucash-user at gnucash.org
>>>> > > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
>>>> > > -----
>>>> > > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>>>> > > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> gnucash-user mailing list
>>>> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
>>>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
>>>> -----
>>>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>>>> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>>>
>>>
>>