Yes, postal money orders do require bank endorsements!

[Sandy Larsen]

Lance has concluded, based on the mere presence of a number stamped on the front of the Hidell money order, that bank endorsements were not required in 1963.

Meanwhile I have proven that bank stamps were required both prior to and subsequent to 1963.

It's only a matter of time before I, or someone else, discovers whether or not the law was different between those two dates, 1925 and 2001. The difficulty lies in accessing the appropriate documents. (And not being well off enough to be able to hire an attorney.)

Edited November 19, 2015 by Sandy Larsen

[Ray Mitcham]

They must have changed the regulations just for 1963, Sandy.

[Sandy Larsen]

They must have changed the regulations just for 1963, Sandy.

LOL good one, Ray.

[James DiEugenio]

But you forget, Lance also produced evidence saying MO were stamped by banks.

Armstrong's upcoming article will quote a bank supervisor in the business for 35 years.

Edited November 19, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Sandy Larsen]

Can't wait to read the article, James.

Thank you for communicating with Armstrong on this matter, and for your support here. And many thanks to John Armstrong for spending his valuable time on this.

[James DiEugenio]

I KIND OF THOUGHT THE NEXT STATEMENT WOULD SURFACE ONCE LANCE GOT SOME RESISTANCE:

LP: At a gut level (and I do have the instincts of a very experienced lawyer), it all strikes me as 99% likely to be 99% nonsense, the sort of stuff I have seen out of the UFO lunatic fringe for the past 50+ years.

To compare Martha Moyer, GIl Jesus, and I assume myself with the MJ 12 advocates is a direct and cheap insult worthy of DVP.

Especially in light of what Sandy just produced and the Armstrong interview.

I guess we should all apologize for not jumping in the air and declaring it all case closed when Lance appeared. My God a long time lawyer was going to teach us all what real research was. Like what we have been doing was playing pick up hoops all the time.

But I especially find problematic the comment of him being a long time lawyer with lawyerly instincts. Why? For two reasons.

1.) If every single aspect of a transaction is dubious, as this one is, then how can one declare the final result as a verification of what came before? What kind of legal logic is that? To me the contrary is more likely. Which is why DVP goes nuts when one points out the fact that its the wrong rifle.

2.) I once had a legal problem many years ago. I interviewed several lawyers. After I interviewed one at his office, he told me he had to leave to pick up a handwriting expert for a court appearance. I asked why. He said it was over a disputed payment issue. I said, "People really do that?" He looked at me bemused--like where have you been?--and said, "Oh, yeah. When it comes to winning or losing it happens all the time."

And this was a SMALL CLAIMS CASE!

But alas, Lance says that what happens all the time is confined to the extremes of Ufology.

BTW, I agree, Ray at Number 122 was a real tickler. And you are welcome Sandy.

Edited November 19, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Sandy Larsen]

In 2001 postal money orders required bank endorsements.

The following is from 2001 CFR Title 12 (Banking) > Part 229 > Subpart C (Collection of Checks, Regulation CC):

229.2 Definitions

As used in this part [Part 229], unless the context requires otherwise:

(k) Check means--

(5) A United States Postal Service money order;

229.35 Indorsements

(a) Indorsement standards. A bank (other than a paying bank) that handles a check during forward collection or a returned check shall legibly indorse the check in accordance with the indorsement standard set forth in appendix D to this part.

Appendix D to Part 229--Indorsement Standards

1. The depositary bank shall indorse a check according to the following specifications:

• The indorsement shall contain—

—The bank’s nine-digit routing number, set off by arrows at each end of the number and pointing toward

the number;

—The bank’s name/location; and

—The indorsement date.

• The indorsement may also contain—

—An optional branch identification;

—An optional trace/sequence number;

—An optional telephone number for receipt of notification of large-dollar returned checks; and

—Other optional information provided that the inclusion of such information does not interfere with the

readability of the indorsement.

• The indorsement shall be written in dark purple or black ink.

• The indorsement shall be placed on the back of the check so that the routing number is wholly contained

in the area 3.0 inches from the leading edge of the check to 1.5 inches from the trailing edge of the check.

Source: http://ithandbook.ffiec.gov/media/resources/3631/frb-12cfr229_subparts%20a_b_c_regu_cc.pdf

In 1987 postal money orders required bank endorsements.

Part 229, which I quoted from above, is called Regulation CC. It was created as a result of the Expedited Funds Availability Act of 1987. So any regulation on bank endorsements prior to 1987 will be found elsewhere.

I suspect that Lance could find the earlier regulation if he wanted to. The question is, does he want to?

EDIT: Added the word "earlier" to clarify.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Sandy Larsen

[James DiEugenio]

More dirt on the casket:

CHAPTER 7000 http://tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov/v2/p4/c700.html

PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING POSTAL MONEY ORDERS

Appendix B – Processing Postal Money Orders

· Purchaser of the PMO designate a “Payee” and fills out the purchaser’s information

· Purchaser pays for the PMO – Postal clerk tears PMO from stub and hands to Purchaser

· Purchaser provides PMO to designated Payee for deposit in exchange for goods/services

· Payee endorses the back of the PMO and deposits PMO in their Bank

· The Bank will then PROCESS the PMO, adding whatever marks, electronic or otherwise to the back of the PMO and record the payment to Payee in their records

o The Bank, now the new Payee, forwards the PMO to their affiliated Federal Reserve Bank for reimbursement of funds and processing
USPS Fed Res Sys process

3.0 Federal Reserve System

3.1General

All money orders are forwarded through the Federal Reserve Banking System, to which commercial banks have access.

3.2 Payment

The postmaster general has the usual right of a drawee to examine money orders presented for payment by banks through the Federal Reserve System and to refuse payment of money orders, and has a reasonable time after presentation to make each examination. Provisional credit is given to the Federal Reserve Bank when it furnishes the money orders for payment by the postmaster general. Money orders are deemed paid only after examination is completed, subject to the postmaster general’s right to make reclamation under 3.4.

3.3 Endorsement

The presenting bank and the endorser of a money order presented for payment are deemed to guarantee to the postmaster general that all prior endorsements are genuine, whether an express guarantee to that effect is placed on the money order. When an endorsement is made by a person other than the payee personally, the presenting bank and the endorser are deemed to guarantee to the postmaster general, in addition to other warranties, that the person who so endorsed had capacity and authority to endorse the money order for the payee.

3.4 Reclamation

The postmaster general has the right to demand refund from the presenting bank of the amount of a paid money order if, after payment, the money order is found to be stolen, or to have a forged or unauthorized endorsement, or to contain any material defect or alteration not discovered on examination. Such right includes, but is not limited to, the right to make reclamation of the amount by which a genuine money order with a proper and authorized endorsement has been raised. Such right must be exercised within a reasonable time after the postmaster general discovers that the money order is stolen, bears a forged or unauthorized endorsement, or is otherwise defective. If refund is not made by the presenting bank within 60 days after demand, the postmaster general takes such actions as may be necessary to protect the interests of the United States.

​BTW, please note the last paragraph, the first sentence. If the PMO has no bank endorsement, if it turns out to be bogus or fraudulent, how could the FRB know who to get their money back from unless it was endorsed by a bank?

Edited November 19, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

More from the same source:

1. The Federal Reserve Bank will record the transaction and also include markings on the back of the PMO in accordance to their batch processing rules.

a. Today, the Federal Reserve Banking System (FRBS)processes everything electronically yet fairly recently the paper products themselves were sent through Batch Processing machines. Section 7040 of Chapter 7000 of the “Procedures for Processing Postal Money Orders” tells us:

i. Section 7040 -Processing Fit Money Orders
7030.25 -Fit Money Order. A money order that can be completely processed on high speed processing equipment.

· Batching and Listing Fit Money Orders. Paper money orders are MICR printed with the routing code (including a routing number of 0000-0020 or 000000204) and the serial number with check digit. The routing number is also preprinted in the upper right corner on the form, which is in the location and front as prescribed by the ABA.

FRBs will process FIT money orders as follows:

· Receive money orders from banks and process on high speed equipment in the manner most compatible with the processing of other categories of cash items.

· Prepare batches of no more than 500 items.

· Insert (in numerical sequence) USPS batch Locator Control Documents so that one is filed at the beginning of each batch of money orders to be read.

· Create a paper-tape list of serial numbers with optional check digit and amount of each money order read. The list will show the batch number and a subtotal for each batch with an overall total of all money orders listed on the paper tape.

· The total amount of fit items should be entered on PS Form 1901, code 100.

· Money orders bearing unreadable MICR characters in the on-us field are not to be rejected and handled as mutilated. List the characters that can be read on the paper tape as a reconcilement aid.

i. Section 7040 & 7050 (Manual process)

· 7050.20 -Insert a USPS Batch Locator Control Document at the beginning of each batch of mutilated money orders.

· 7050.30 -Prepare an adding machine listing of each batch showing the following information:

a. FRB name or code at the top.

b. The amount of each item.

c. The total amount of the batch.

d. FRB clearance date.

e. Batch number

ii. Section 7070 - Processing Old Style Money Orders

· "Punch card" money orders that have the ABA routing number 0000-0119 will be handled as mutilated items. They should be identified as old style "punch card" money orders on the PS Form 1901 for code 004

7030.60 -Bank No. or FRB Code (Appendix No. 1 ). This term refers to the four digits of the FRB routing symbol. This number is to be used on various documents for charging or shipping of money orders to USPS.

Section 7035 -Charges For Postal Money Orders

The FRBs will prepare SF 5515, "Debit Voucher," for 8-digit accounting station code or agency location code (ALC) 18-00-0005 to charge postal money orders based on cash letters or other deposit documents received that have accompanying postal money order documents. After machine classification is made, in order to correct any amount undercharged for money orders made on the original charge of the SF 5515, another SF 5515 will be prepared and processed. If an overcharge is made on the original SF 5515, the FRB will process an SF 215 "Deposit Ticket" for the amount overcharged to ALC 18-00-0005. Appendix No. 1 provides instructions and the distribution of the SF's 5515 and 215. The net amount of all debit vouchers and deposit tickets reported to ALC 18-00-0005 must be shown on the FRBs Daily Balance Wire to BGFO on line 14-A. This amount is reconciled to the confirmed copies of the debit vouchers and deposit tickets received at MOD, St. Louis, Missouri.

PS Form 1901 "Advice of Classification for Postal Money Orders" is basically a reconciliation form prepared by the FRB. Certain data from the SF's 5515 or 215 (confirmed date, document, number, and amount) will be. shown under the block titled "Charge to ALC 18-00-0005." This amount must agree with the total for the block titled "Classification of Postal Money Orders" which reflects the description, code, number of items, and amount of the postal money orders being shipped. The money order documents will be shipped to MOD, St. Louis, Missouri. Adjustments of errors made on previous shipments will also be reported under the "Classification of Postal Money Orders" block and supported by completing the "Schedule of Adjustments Entered Under Code 003" shown at the bottom of the PS Form 1901 (Appendix No. 1). NO COPIES OF THE PS FORM 1901 WILL BE SENT TO TREASURY.

Each PS Form 1901 is accountable to USPS, therefore, if the FRB voids a PS Form 1901, send all copies to:

(Some excess info deleted here.)

Edited November 19, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Last installment form the same source:

7050 -Processing Mutilated Money Orders

This section relates to the handling of mutilated paper money orders with ABA routing numbers 0000-0020 or 000000204.

7050.10 -Mutilated paper money orders must be grouped in batches not to exceed 200 documents in a batch. If the total number of mutilated items does not exceed 200, they may be handled as one batch. For larger quantities, make as many batches as necessary, not exceeding 200 in any one batch.

7050.20 -Insert a USPS Batch Locator Control Document at the beginning of each batch of mutilated money orders.

7050.30 -Prepare an adding machine listing of each batch showing the following information:

■FRB name or code at the top.

■The amount of each item.

■The total amount of the batch.

■FRB clearance date.

■Batch number.

7050.40 -Batches of the paper money orders that cannot be machine processed without first being MICR amount encoded may be delivered to the USPS representative without processing, provided the above requirements are essentially met.

7050.50 - The total amount of mutilated items should be entered on the PS Form 1901, code 110.

Section 7060 - Detection Of Stolen Or Raised Money Orders

FRBs are not required to institute regular routing procedures for the detection of stolen or raised money orders. However, each FRB will cooperate, in special circumstances, to aid USPS representatives in the detection of these items.

Section 7065 - Adjustment of Errors

Adjustment of errors and charges by the FRB will be made by using SF 5515 for ALC 18-00-0005, and PS Form 1176 "Schedule of Differences in Money Order Clearances". (Appendix No. 1). All charges or credits accepted will be identified by the FRB, itemizing the schedule number, as indicated on PS Form I 1 76, and amount on the PS Form 1901 for code 003.

Section 7070 - Processing Old Style Money Orders

"Punch card" money orders that have the ABA routing number 0000-0119 will be handled as mutilated items. They should be identified as old style "punch card" money orders on the PS Form 1901 for code 004.

Section 7075 -Processing Domestic International Money Orders (Semi-Domestic)

Canadian money orders, ABA routing number 0000-0127, and Canal Zone money orders, ABA routing number 0000-0800, can be mechanically processed; all others must be processed manually. The batch size of Canadian money orders cannot exceed 200 documents. Money orders of different countries cannot be intermingled; each country must be batched separately. The total of all domestic-international money orders should be shown under code 400 on the PS Form 1901.

Section 7080 -Other Procedural Matters

7080.10 -Postal Service Reimbursement to FRBs. The Postal Service has agreed to reimburse the FRBs for services provided in processing postal money orders beyond the level of service provided to financial institutions paying cash items. Charges will be determined by an annual survey, according to Federal Reserve and U.S. Postal Service agreements, and will be billed monthly with a single bill for each Federal Reserve District submitted to the Money Order Division, and will be paid at the end of each 6 months. The Postal Service reserves the right to review and challenge the method used in calculating these charges

Courtesy of David Josephs.

More to come from John Armstrong. This is starting to resemble Holm vs Rousey.

[James DiEugenio]

Quoting Sandy:

—The bank’s nine-digit routing number, set off by arrows at each end of the number and pointing toward

the number;
—The bank’s name/location; and
—The indorsement date.

This is a point Armstrong will go over in detail in his article.

[Guest]

I suspect that Lance could find the regulation if he wanted to. The question is, does he want to?

Hello? The point of this bombshell is what? As you yourself note, Federal Reserve Regulation CC was adopted in response to the 1987 Expedited Funds Availability Act. I myself had posted contemporary (1960's era) materials suggesting postal money orders should have been endorsed as they proceeded through the banking chain. The questions are: (1) Was the Klein's money order in fact "endorsed," and we perhaps do not understand what "endorsed" meant at that time? (2) If it was not endorsed, should that have been fatal or was there some banking practice in place of which we are unaware? and (3) If it was not endorsed and should have been, how did it end up at the federal Records Retention Center in Alexandria, VA, with a File Locator Number on it?

What is it I should have "wanted" to find - a Federal Reserve Regulation adopted in 1988, when punch cards were obsolete? Why?

I took the time to review materials relating to the money order in the John Armstrong archives at Baylor University - Box 18, Tabs 22-24. I also reviewed the text and footnotes pertaining to the money order in Harvey and Lee and the relevant portions of the Harvey and Lee website. The idea that the money order should have four levels of endorsements (i.e., including Klein's) is attributed to Robert Wilmouth, Vice President of the First National Bank of Chicago. This is stated flatly in Harvey and Lee (page 451) and is repeated all over the Internet as though it were gospel, yet I have been unable to find where Wilmouth actually discussed the endorsement issue. I feel sure Armstrong did not invent this out of whole cloth, so I am hoping someone can steer us to the actual statement. (Wilmouth did assure the FBI the money order would be found at a postal records center in Kansas City, which was incorrect, but undoubtedly he was the infallible fount of all wisdom regarding postal money order endorsements).

As I reviewed the materials - which are fascinating - it was very striking to watch the scramble for the money order unfold in real time. It all strikes me as very plausible and not at all suggestive of people who were engaged in a conspiracy (they could have been, of course, but it seems extremely far-fetched). Much more plausible, to me anyway, is someone looking to build a conspiracy theory many years after the fact who seizes upon the inevitable mistakes and discrepancies that creep into documents as fallible humans scramble to deal with an event of the magnitude of the assassination of the President. If a bogus money order had been a preplanned element of an assassination conspiracy, the post-assassination events surrounding it would have unfolded like clockwork. Just as an example, does this smell like a conspiracy?

"Shortly thereafter. Mr. Marks was contacted by the reporting agent and advised thst some difflenity was experienced in bringing the computer machines up to operational level; however, he believed that it would take approximately 13 minutes for the machines, when in full operation, to locate subject postal money order. Mr. Marks stated it would be necessary then for an employee of the Federal Records Center, Alexandria, Virginia, to physically obtain the money order. Mr. Marks stated the latter operation would take approximately 20 additional minutes, after which he would personally be furnished with subject original money order."

A fake File Locator Number? Really? This strikes you folks as plausible? (Interestingly, the digits that I believe to be the FLN do not appear to have caused any discussion at the time - nor, for that matter, did the supposedly "missing" endorsements.)

Sorry to attempt to bring common sense to this discussion. You people enjoy pissing all over yourselves so much you wouldn't know what to do with the rest of your lives if the assassination were actually solved.

До свидания. I'll check back sometime to see if someone who Actually Knew What He Was Talking About ever surfaced.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Guest

[James DiEugenio]

We know what your definition of common sense is Lance.

[Sandy Larsen]

More dirt on the casket:

CHAPTER 7000 http://tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov/v2/p4/c700.html

PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING POSTAL MONEY ORDERS

Appendix B – Processing Postal Money Orders

· Purchaser of the PMO designate a “Payee” and fills out the purchaser’s information

· Purchaser pays for the PMO – Postal clerk tears PMO from stub and hands to Purchaser

· Purchaser provides PMO to designated Payee for deposit in exchange for goods/services

· Payee endorses the back of the PMO and deposits PMO in their Bank

· The Bank will then PROCESS the PMO, adding whatever marks, electronic or otherwise to the back of the PMO and record the payment to Payee in their records

o The Bank, now the new Payee, forwards the PMO to their affiliated Federal Reserve Bank for reimbursement of funds and processing

USPS Fed Res Sys process

3.0 Federal Reserve System

3.1General

All money orders are forwarded through the Federal Reserve Banking System, to which commercial banks have access.

3.2 Payment

The postmaster general has the usual right of a drawee to examine money orders presented for payment by banks through the Federal Reserve System and to refuse payment of money orders, and has a reasonable time after presentation to make each examination. Provisional credit is given to the Federal Reserve Bank when it furnishes the money orders for payment by the postmaster general. Money orders are deemed paid only after examination is completed, subject to the postmaster general’s right to make reclamation under 3.4.

3.3 Endorsement

The presenting bank and the endorser of a money order presented for payment are deemed to guarantee to the postmaster general that all prior endorsements are genuine, whether an express guarantee to that effect is placed on the money order. When an endorsement is made by a person other than the payee personally, the presenting bank and the endorser are deemed to guarantee to the postmaster general, in addition to other warranties, that the person who so endorsed had capacity and authority to endorse the money order for the payee.

3.4 Reclamation

The postmaster general has the right to demand refund from the presenting bank of the amount of a paid money order if, after payment, the money order is found to be stolen, or to have a forged or unauthorized endorsement, or to contain any material defect or alteration not discovered on examination. Such right includes, but is not limited to, the right to make reclamation of the amount by which a genuine money order with a proper and authorized endorsement has been raised. Such right must be exercised within a reasonable time after the postmaster general discovers that the money order is stolen, bears a forged or unauthorized endorsement, or is otherwise defective. If refund is not made by the presenting bank within 60 days after demand, the postmaster general takes such actions as may be necessary to protect the interests of the United States.

​BTW, please note the last paragraph, the first sentence. If the PMO has no bank endorsement, if it turns out to be bogus or fraudulent, how could the FRB know who to get their money back from unless it was endorsed by a bank?

James,

The problem with Chapter 7000 of the Treasury Financial Manual, for our purposes, is that it doesn't specify anywhere that bank endorsements are required. Correct me if I'm wrong.

It is far better to quote from Title 12 of the CFR, Part 229, as I did in post #119 on page 8. There it specifically states that bank endorsements must be used on checks collected by FRBs, where the definition of a check includes postal money orders.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Sandy Larsen

[Thomas Graves]

I suspect that Lance could find the regulation if he wanted to. The question is, does he want to?

[...]

I myself had posted contemporary (1960's era) materials suggesting postal money orders should have been endorsed as they proceeded through the banking chain. The questions are: (1) Was the Klein's money order in fact "endorsed," and we perhaps do not understand what "endorsed" meant at that time? (2) If it was not endorsed, should that have been fatal or was there some banking practice in place of which we are unaware? and (3) If it was not endorsed and should have been, how did it end up at the federal Records Retention Center in Alexandria, VA, with a File Locator Number on it?

[...]

Excellent framing of the issue-at-hand, Lance.

Keep up the good work.

--Tommy

Edited November 19, 2015 by Thomas Graves