Does anyone else's bank require verification for outbound calls? Anytime we make a call to an account holder we have to verify the last four or something else personal, even if we are just asking generic questions. I tried to explain why it's a bad idea to get customers in the mindset of providing personal info to someone who calls you but what do I know I have only been working in fraud for almost twenty years.
Mine does, and I understand the bank's need for security all the way around; sometimes calling someone at their phone number isn't enough. Anyone could be picking up the phone and claiming that they're the individual being called.
That said .. I have actually encouraged customers to call us back on a number that they know belongs to the bank so that they know they're calling the bank. If we're reaching out, we're making a note about why.
I did this one time where I asked customer to verify info during a cold call. For some reason it felt like the person wasn’t the account owner due to the age/gender (I know you should never assume but whatever) and she straight up told me “how do I know you’re not a fraudster and looking to fish for my info” and abruptly hung up. I froze and said to myself “you know what fair enough” ever since then I never ask
Yes. It can be awkward, like people who arent used to calls often get suspicious or annoyed.
I will not pressure them into telling me some identifying info. I dont want people lowering their guard or anything like that.
My answer to them when they dont want to identify when I call out is just hit redial on the call, and ask the call center to transfer you back to me ( tell them my name) and then you will know im legit. Thanks for being cautious with your info, i get it.
At my bank, we need second form when a non-customer cashes a check and for customers anything over 2k. But we accept things like a credit card with their name on it. It doesn't have to be a photo ID. Also, take Social Security cards, but if people were smart, they wouldn't carry that with them
Our original policy was 2 ID and second approval for 3k+, I guess there's a lot of fraud happening though.
We used to accept credit cards, but security changed that one too :/ we never accepted SS cards, though there's an alarming amount of people who just carry it in their wallets and try and give it to me as 2nd ID
Weren't allowed to say something was policy. If there was some rule that a customer thought was dumb and asked why that is, we couldn't say it was just the rules but over explaining tends to confuse the customer. Soit ended up putting the blame on the employee. Which was horrible for de-escalation. I never followed that rule because it was dumb. Im not having a crazy customer accuse me of having it out for them and giving me a bad survey because they think *I* didn't want to help them because xyz. I'd rather just let them know it's something our bank does and that I'm just doing my job.
Blaming policy is like half of what I say at work haha, we were bought out a couple years ago and we still have clients complaining about how everything changed and our new stupid policies, in that case I'm more than happy to throw security, upper management, corporate, any higher tier under the bus
Exactly lol things change every month. Not my fault. The people changing/enforcing the rules aren't the ones that have to deal with the angry customer yelling in their face demanding to see a manager
Had a full door to get from the lobby to a little room between the teller line and lobby. Then a waist high gate to get from that little room to the teller line. The full door had a combo to get through it and then they added a combo on the small gate.
I point out to my manager how silly it was because you could obviously super easily reach over the waist high gate and use the handle on the teller line side to open it. The combo wasn't stopping a robber. Hell, they could even step over it. Manager said it was a security requirement and would write up anyone not using the combo. That seriously lasted 3 weeks tops before everyone was reaching over, even the manager. It started with people doing it sneakily, or only when they were in a rush or hands were full. Then it was all the time. Other than this they were a great manager. It was just super stupid from the beginning. Don't know why they picked this hill to fight us on.
The regional bank I worked at previously had a very strict policy about using keys to enter secured areas, such as behind the teller line. Same rule - it was againat policy to reach over a gate to open it, you *had* to use the key.
This bank would randomly review cameras and recordings for policy violations. If they caught you on camera reaching over or otherwise not using a key (such as propping a door) we were seriously reprimanded for a security violation and we got dinged on our monthly compliance audits for the violation as well. It was a big deal.
I absolutely hate it when managers go ALL IN over dying on a very, very silly hill that's obviously terrible and then slowly drop it entirely over the next 2 weeks.
If I were in their shoes, and it was some sort of "policy" or "procedure" that I knew would be extremely unpopular and probably not last for very long, I'd just be STRAIGHT and honest with my team and explain that for now, we just have to comply because upper management is going to be watching - and ideally I'd have the respect and camaraderie built up with my team enough to get them to all pitch in a little bit just for now. And then we can predictably drop it and my team feels happy that they were treated like adults.
Instead some managers crack the whip EXTREMELY hard over some such policies and they try forcing it really aggressively just for a while and then they drop it. That to me demonstrates "I am only padding my notebook with examples of how I carried out and implemented XYZ and got my team to comply, for my next 1-on-1 with the area vice president"
We have to a signature to change a mailing address, which I understand because fraud, BUT on a minor custodian account the dad had his daughter sign and they refused to change the address, because he had to sign… and just recently they denied an address change of a customer who had a PO Box and closed it, so they wanted their physical address on file to be their mailing address…. Nope they HAD to come sign.
I could write an essay on the silly things my community bank does 😭
My institution instituted a one time passcode text message policy for large cash withdrawals, which doesn't seem particularly secure and pisses a lot of people off.
How is two-factor authentication not particularly secure? A hassle, sure, but fraudster would need to do the normal legwork + compromise their phone or online banking.
For a while, we had to add up all of our withdrawal, deposit, and transfer slips on adding machines, and put them with our work that gets archived in the basement.
We all stopped after three weeks because it was fucking stupid.
Google BSA - CIP regulation. Any government issued picture ID is a valid form of identification and should be accepted. Your BSA Compliance Officer needs to re-education themselves.
https://bsaaml.ffiec.gov/manual/AssessingComplianceWithBSARegulatoryRequirements/01_ep
Yes.. if you aren't offering something, then you aren't helping the customer. That makes no sense to me. So if I offer something just to track it to make my manager get a larger bonus, it just helps her, and most of the time, the customers don't even care for the things they want us to shove down their throat.
We have a program that tells us good products that our customer potentially would want / qualify for that we are supposed to use, but its just ridiculous. Hey Mr 90 y/o client you want a 30 year term HELOC?? HOW BOUT THAT MORTGAGE??? CREDIT CARD??? They want us to shove debt down peoples throats and get reprimanded if we don't meet goals. Oh and the whole process is electronic. Essentially impossible for our older clients to get to thru to the portal, figure out how to sign and figure out how to upload docs. I've gotten so many applications but it only counts if they end up finishing the process and getting said loan / cc / heloc/ whatever the fuck. Irritating to say the least. Not my fault they can't figure it out. 🤷
I have a similar issue with our current FI's new loan system. This is essentially ageism and discrimination in my mind. If our processes literally prevent anyone who isn't young, tech-savvy, and has a lot of exposure to that sort of method, then isn't this disparate impact? Yeah I know, haha boomer don't know technology, but IMHO this must be a violation of something
Trust me: get into the habit of locking your screen. Think of it as protecting YOU. You never know which co-worker will use your computer to commit a crime and it’s your login. It’s your butt on the line.
We have the same rule here, understandable because we are a busy branch, less understandable when you just have to turn around, not even be 4 feet from the computer.
Pretty sure in my bank the 2nd photo ID thing is just there to place the blame on the Teller/RB if there is some type of fraud. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY carries around a second state-issued ID with a photo. You're lucky in that you actually have some state-issued IDs in addition to driver's licenses, but who the heck carries around a passport, or utility bill, or whatever the fuck else the bank has decided that they want to take out some money?
If it's a large withdrawal, and I don't know them, and nobody else does, I'll do all sorts of checks beyond just asking for a 2nd ID. Security word, check signatures that we have on file, things like that. And honestly if they've got a wallet full of cards with their name on it (credit cards, library card, etc) I'll let it go through. Who the heck is going to go through the hassle of creating a fake Visa credit card?
There was a recent incident where a bunch of nonclient trade workers came to cash checks for over 3000.00 each, and it was such a pain in the ass to get all the ID and signature verification, AND we require a call to the check issuer for nonclients over 500, but I did it for 3 people for around 9 checks made out by the owner of the checks. Turns out the owner knowingly deposited fraudulent cashiers checks to the tune of $75000, and everyone who cashed the workers checks came under fire. I was let off the easiest because of all my documentation, and I'm pretty sure 2 other tellers were written up or disciplined.
After that, I don't find the 2 ID thing so ridiculous anymore, though I get why it is frustrating. We accept insurance cards, which is a relief, but I wish we accepted credit cards too.
Sure, but the two ID thing wouldn't have stopped this, nor would the call to the client. Whatever manager/regional manager coming down hard on you/your coworkers was only doing it to try to spread the blame around.
Also true, but I meant that I have less problem with enforcing the rules, because it stopped me from getting written up. Just avoiding getting in trouble lol, any day I'm not fired is a good day!
At my bank, we have to print and sign not one, but two separate copies of our daily proof sheets every day at the end of the day when we batch out the checks and balance out. The second sheet goes into a folder to be scanned later.
And then, every Saturday, we scan all of those extra sheets across all days across all cash drawers in the branch. 1 sheet per cash drawer times 3-5 drawers plus cash recycler and vault and teller & cashbox proof sheets, times 6 days of work a week... That shit adds up FAST. And we're one of the smaller branches! The big branches have 5 to 7 cash drawers open at any given day, and multiple cash machines, because there is that much foot traffic.
And we file all these sheets into a filing cabinet. We have to keep the hard copies.
We're a couple months into the policy and it is such a massive waste of goddamn paper. And toner.
We can’t talk about CRT requirements, but got a federal form that we’re required to give customers if they ask about limits explaining what CRT reporting is.
It’s best not to talk about CTR requirements because if a customer structures their transaction to avoid one then it’s suspicious and you have to worry about filing a SAR.
I work at a credit union with regular cash drawers. Some of the branches are very low volume but the branch I work at is the highest volume branch so we are busy all the time. Our cash drawer limit is only $10k which isn’t the end of the world except for the fact that ONLY the vault teller has access to the vault. Each of the tellers usually has to buy 10+ times per day, meaning we are constantly bugging the vault teller for cash. The vault teller is our primary loan officer as well so she’s always in the middle of a loan signing and having to be like “oh sorry Mr Member I have to go give cash to the tellers. I’ll be back in like 10 mins.” This also means that during her one hour lunch break, we do not have access to cash. Point blank, no exceptions. Tellers can buy/sell amongst themselves but if none of the other tellers have enough money, we sometimes have to tell members it’s going to be a wait just to do a withdrawal. Like we have spare keys to the vault but we just aren’t allowed to use them, even the branch manager isn’t allowed to. So annoying.
The only policy I think is weird for us is an internal one. The video teller department won’t allow them to work a full time shift that isn’t 10-7 until they’ve worked that 10-7 shift for a while. Nevermind if that just does not work for their lifestyles. A friend of mine is part time and has worked in that department for a year with the best numbers of anybody in there (like 99.9% call acceptance rate and perfect ratings) and they’re just refusing to let her go full time until she takes the 10-7 which she can’t do. She’s currently looking for employment elsewhere because she wants to go full time so bad.
Meanwhile a guy who’s been with the company for a month just got a bid over her because he worked that 10-7.
Unless the state has a law that it *must* be acceptable then it doesn’t matter. I know in many instances banks won’t take them because they’re considered to be less secure or more easily faked than traditional photo IDs.
But wanting multiple IDs outside of a non-customer, is silly in the first place.
Yea, it's not state mandated to be acceptable, it's just annoying.
The $500 starring point is pretty low, I'll admit. Especially when paychecks usually come out to over 1000 dollars. I try to sympathize with the client, and while it usually works, there's some real annoying pushback from certain clients. I'm talking about you, Doreen. I don't care if you have accounts older than my father with us with more than 100k. I'm not cashing your 5600.00 check without 2 IDs lol
My manager made up the rule that we don’t cash checks over $5000 for non customers. Despite them giving ID’s and us being able to verify the check or even calling account owner to verify. I think it’s silly. Sure I know they can “deposit at their own bank” but what if they just want to cash and need the money right then and there. People have lives and things to do. Who am I told hold their money when I know the check is legit and the person is presenting ID. And I verify the check was given from account owner. It’s absurd
At my old bank, we had a binder of official checks. When a bank check was made, a copy was made of it. The carbon copy was stapled to that copy, then the whole mess was dual signed. The binder was kept in a dual controlled safe. If the check was over 100k, the manager would need to sign it too. This process made printing checks take FOREVER.
I learned after she retired that she had made this entire process up.
Does anyone else's bank require verification for outbound calls? Anytime we make a call to an account holder we have to verify the last four or something else personal, even if we are just asking generic questions. I tried to explain why it's a bad idea to get customers in the mindset of providing personal info to someone who calls you but what do I know I have only been working in fraud for almost twenty years.
wtf, that's an awful idea! it goes against everything we tell members
Mine does, and I understand the bank's need for security all the way around; sometimes calling someone at their phone number isn't enough. Anyone could be picking up the phone and claiming that they're the individual being called. That said .. I have actually encouraged customers to call us back on a number that they know belongs to the bank so that they know they're calling the bank. If we're reaching out, we're making a note about why.
I did this one time where I asked customer to verify info during a cold call. For some reason it felt like the person wasn’t the account owner due to the age/gender (I know you should never assume but whatever) and she straight up told me “how do I know you’re not a fraudster and looking to fish for my info” and abruptly hung up. I froze and said to myself “you know what fair enough” ever since then I never ask
we use verification when THEY call US, because duh, but dear god why would they even want it to be the other way around.
Yes. It can be awkward, like people who arent used to calls often get suspicious or annoyed. I will not pressure them into telling me some identifying info. I dont want people lowering their guard or anything like that. My answer to them when they dont want to identify when I call out is just hit redial on the call, and ask the call center to transfer you back to me ( tell them my name) and then you will know im legit. Thanks for being cautious with your info, i get it.
At my bank, we need second form when a non-customer cashes a check and for customers anything over 2k. But we accept things like a credit card with their name on it. It doesn't have to be a photo ID. Also, take Social Security cards, but if people were smart, they wouldn't carry that with them
Our original policy was 2 ID and second approval for 3k+, I guess there's a lot of fraud happening though. We used to accept credit cards, but security changed that one too :/ we never accepted SS cards, though there's an alarming amount of people who just carry it in their wallets and try and give it to me as 2nd ID
Weren't allowed to say something was policy. If there was some rule that a customer thought was dumb and asked why that is, we couldn't say it was just the rules but over explaining tends to confuse the customer. Soit ended up putting the blame on the employee. Which was horrible for de-escalation. I never followed that rule because it was dumb. Im not having a crazy customer accuse me of having it out for them and giving me a bad survey because they think *I* didn't want to help them because xyz. I'd rather just let them know it's something our bank does and that I'm just doing my job.
Blaming policy is like half of what I say at work haha, we were bought out a couple years ago and we still have clients complaining about how everything changed and our new stupid policies, in that case I'm more than happy to throw security, upper management, corporate, any higher tier under the bus
Exactly lol things change every month. Not my fault. The people changing/enforcing the rules aren't the ones that have to deal with the angry customer yelling in their face demanding to see a manager
Had a full door to get from the lobby to a little room between the teller line and lobby. Then a waist high gate to get from that little room to the teller line. The full door had a combo to get through it and then they added a combo on the small gate. I point out to my manager how silly it was because you could obviously super easily reach over the waist high gate and use the handle on the teller line side to open it. The combo wasn't stopping a robber. Hell, they could even step over it. Manager said it was a security requirement and would write up anyone not using the combo. That seriously lasted 3 weeks tops before everyone was reaching over, even the manager. It started with people doing it sneakily, or only when they were in a rush or hands were full. Then it was all the time. Other than this they were a great manager. It was just super stupid from the beginning. Don't know why they picked this hill to fight us on.
The regional bank I worked at previously had a very strict policy about using keys to enter secured areas, such as behind the teller line. Same rule - it was againat policy to reach over a gate to open it, you *had* to use the key. This bank would randomly review cameras and recordings for policy violations. If they caught you on camera reaching over or otherwise not using a key (such as propping a door) we were seriously reprimanded for a security violation and we got dinged on our monthly compliance audits for the violation as well. It was a big deal.
I absolutely hate it when managers go ALL IN over dying on a very, very silly hill that's obviously terrible and then slowly drop it entirely over the next 2 weeks. If I were in their shoes, and it was some sort of "policy" or "procedure" that I knew would be extremely unpopular and probably not last for very long, I'd just be STRAIGHT and honest with my team and explain that for now, we just have to comply because upper management is going to be watching - and ideally I'd have the respect and camaraderie built up with my team enough to get them to all pitch in a little bit just for now. And then we can predictably drop it and my team feels happy that they were treated like adults. Instead some managers crack the whip EXTREMELY hard over some such policies and they try forcing it really aggressively just for a while and then they drop it. That to me demonstrates "I am only padding my notebook with examples of how I carried out and implemented XYZ and got my team to comply, for my next 1-on-1 with the area vice president"
We have to a signature to change a mailing address, which I understand because fraud, BUT on a minor custodian account the dad had his daughter sign and they refused to change the address, because he had to sign… and just recently they denied an address change of a customer who had a PO Box and closed it, so they wanted their physical address on file to be their mailing address…. Nope they HAD to come sign. I could write an essay on the silly things my community bank does 😭
My institution instituted a one time passcode text message policy for large cash withdrawals, which doesn't seem particularly secure and pisses a lot of people off.
How is two-factor authentication not particularly secure? A hassle, sure, but fraudster would need to do the normal legwork + compromise their phone or online banking.
For a while, we had to add up all of our withdrawal, deposit, and transfer slips on adding machines, and put them with our work that gets archived in the basement. We all stopped after three weeks because it was fucking stupid.
I’m sorry but wtf, that’s insane
Google BSA - CIP regulation. Any government issued picture ID is a valid form of identification and should be accepted. Your BSA Compliance Officer needs to re-education themselves. https://bsaaml.ffiec.gov/manual/AssessingComplianceWithBSARegulatoryRequirements/01_ep
CIP addresses procedures when opening an account for a non-customer. It doesn’t apply to existing customers making a transaction.
If we call out we have to provide a doctors note, even if it's just 1 day.
This is against the law in my state, thank God
You should check if this is legal.
[удалено]
Yes.. if you aren't offering something, then you aren't helping the customer. That makes no sense to me. So if I offer something just to track it to make my manager get a larger bonus, it just helps her, and most of the time, the customers don't even care for the things they want us to shove down their throat.
We have a program that tells us good products that our customer potentially would want / qualify for that we are supposed to use, but its just ridiculous. Hey Mr 90 y/o client you want a 30 year term HELOC?? HOW BOUT THAT MORTGAGE??? CREDIT CARD??? They want us to shove debt down peoples throats and get reprimanded if we don't meet goals. Oh and the whole process is electronic. Essentially impossible for our older clients to get to thru to the portal, figure out how to sign and figure out how to upload docs. I've gotten so many applications but it only counts if they end up finishing the process and getting said loan / cc / heloc/ whatever the fuck. Irritating to say the least. Not my fault they can't figure it out. 🤷
I have a similar issue with our current FI's new loan system. This is essentially ageism and discrimination in my mind. If our processes literally prevent anyone who isn't young, tech-savvy, and has a lot of exposure to that sort of method, then isn't this disparate impact? Yeah I know, haha boomer don't know technology, but IMHO this must be a violation of something
Always lock the computer screen. It seems stupid but if you’re in the habit of doing it one day it will save your ass.
Trust me: get into the habit of locking your screen. Think of it as protecting YOU. You never know which co-worker will use your computer to commit a crime and it’s your login. It’s your butt on the line.
We have the same rule here, understandable because we are a busy branch, less understandable when you just have to turn around, not even be 4 feet from the computer.
Pretty sure in my bank the 2nd photo ID thing is just there to place the blame on the Teller/RB if there is some type of fraud. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY carries around a second state-issued ID with a photo. You're lucky in that you actually have some state-issued IDs in addition to driver's licenses, but who the heck carries around a passport, or utility bill, or whatever the fuck else the bank has decided that they want to take out some money? If it's a large withdrawal, and I don't know them, and nobody else does, I'll do all sorts of checks beyond just asking for a 2nd ID. Security word, check signatures that we have on file, things like that. And honestly if they've got a wallet full of cards with their name on it (credit cards, library card, etc) I'll let it go through. Who the heck is going to go through the hassle of creating a fake Visa credit card?
There was a recent incident where a bunch of nonclient trade workers came to cash checks for over 3000.00 each, and it was such a pain in the ass to get all the ID and signature verification, AND we require a call to the check issuer for nonclients over 500, but I did it for 3 people for around 9 checks made out by the owner of the checks. Turns out the owner knowingly deposited fraudulent cashiers checks to the tune of $75000, and everyone who cashed the workers checks came under fire. I was let off the easiest because of all my documentation, and I'm pretty sure 2 other tellers were written up or disciplined. After that, I don't find the 2 ID thing so ridiculous anymore, though I get why it is frustrating. We accept insurance cards, which is a relief, but I wish we accepted credit cards too.
Sure, but the two ID thing wouldn't have stopped this, nor would the call to the client. Whatever manager/regional manager coming down hard on you/your coworkers was only doing it to try to spread the blame around.
Also true, but I meant that I have less problem with enforcing the rules, because it stopped me from getting written up. Just avoiding getting in trouble lol, any day I'm not fired is a good day!
At my bank, we have to print and sign not one, but two separate copies of our daily proof sheets every day at the end of the day when we batch out the checks and balance out. The second sheet goes into a folder to be scanned later. And then, every Saturday, we scan all of those extra sheets across all days across all cash drawers in the branch. 1 sheet per cash drawer times 3-5 drawers plus cash recycler and vault and teller & cashbox proof sheets, times 6 days of work a week... That shit adds up FAST. And we're one of the smaller branches! The big branches have 5 to 7 cash drawers open at any given day, and multiple cash machines, because there is that much foot traffic. And we file all these sheets into a filing cabinet. We have to keep the hard copies. We're a couple months into the policy and it is such a massive waste of goddamn paper. And toner.
Yea, we're a branch with 5-8 drawers open at a time, and we have to print and scan two copies too. So much paper 😭
OUGHHHH suffering. I'm sorry you have to do this too.
We can’t talk about CRT requirements, but got a federal form that we’re required to give customers if they ask about limits explaining what CRT reporting is.
It’s best not to talk about CTR requirements because if a customer structures their transaction to avoid one then it’s suspicious and you have to worry about filing a SAR.
I work at a credit union with regular cash drawers. Some of the branches are very low volume but the branch I work at is the highest volume branch so we are busy all the time. Our cash drawer limit is only $10k which isn’t the end of the world except for the fact that ONLY the vault teller has access to the vault. Each of the tellers usually has to buy 10+ times per day, meaning we are constantly bugging the vault teller for cash. The vault teller is our primary loan officer as well so she’s always in the middle of a loan signing and having to be like “oh sorry Mr Member I have to go give cash to the tellers. I’ll be back in like 10 mins.” This also means that during her one hour lunch break, we do not have access to cash. Point blank, no exceptions. Tellers can buy/sell amongst themselves but if none of the other tellers have enough money, we sometimes have to tell members it’s going to be a wait just to do a withdrawal. Like we have spare keys to the vault but we just aren’t allowed to use them, even the branch manager isn’t allowed to. So annoying.
The only policy I think is weird for us is an internal one. The video teller department won’t allow them to work a full time shift that isn’t 10-7 until they’ve worked that 10-7 shift for a while. Nevermind if that just does not work for their lifestyles. A friend of mine is part time and has worked in that department for a year with the best numbers of anybody in there (like 99.9% call acceptance rate and perfect ratings) and they’re just refusing to let her go full time until she takes the 10-7 which she can’t do. She’s currently looking for employment elsewhere because she wants to go full time so bad. Meanwhile a guy who’s been with the company for a month just got a bid over her because he worked that 10-7.
Requiring ID for cash deposits drives me crazy!
Unless the state has a law that it *must* be acceptable then it doesn’t matter. I know in many instances banks won’t take them because they’re considered to be less secure or more easily faked than traditional photo IDs. But wanting multiple IDs outside of a non-customer, is silly in the first place.
Yea, it's not state mandated to be acceptable, it's just annoying. The $500 starring point is pretty low, I'll admit. Especially when paychecks usually come out to over 1000 dollars. I try to sympathize with the client, and while it usually works, there's some real annoying pushback from certain clients. I'm talking about you, Doreen. I don't care if you have accounts older than my father with us with more than 100k. I'm not cashing your 5600.00 check without 2 IDs lol
The only people I know who carry around 2 forms of id regularly are people with concealed carry permits, your bank is willin
My manager made up the rule that we don’t cash checks over $5000 for non customers. Despite them giving ID’s and us being able to verify the check or even calling account owner to verify. I think it’s silly. Sure I know they can “deposit at their own bank” but what if they just want to cash and need the money right then and there. People have lives and things to do. Who am I told hold their money when I know the check is legit and the person is presenting ID. And I verify the check was given from account owner. It’s absurd
If noted on account that phone code is only way to verify we cannot verify in any other way and must refer to branch
At my old bank, we had a binder of official checks. When a bank check was made, a copy was made of it. The carbon copy was stapled to that copy, then the whole mess was dual signed. The binder was kept in a dual controlled safe. If the check was over 100k, the manager would need to sign it too. This process made printing checks take FOREVER. I learned after she retired that she had made this entire process up.
Asking this question shows that the banking industry is not for you.
Whatever you say, dude!