Threatened With Theft Charge After Re-Depositing Bad Checks

[supertech]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Georgia

My wife was working for a family member (first mistake) and they were not paying her on time. they finally cut her a check for around 1000 bucks (they owed about 1600). Took it by their bank, verified it was good, but wanted to charge to cash it, so just deposited it. few days later, its returned. they say bank made error, stopped payment on wrong check, gave her a new check for same amount. guess what? it bounces too, as well as causing several overdrafts on my account, including my house payment. they say its banks fault, money is gone from their account, will have to be investigated. two or three weeks go by with no responses to phone or emails, meanwhile im broke and can barely feed my family. so my wife is on her way to courthouse to find out what we can do about this and decides to stop at their bank with the two returned checks. they say money is in the account, you can cash them. so she does. both checks barely cover the nsf charges and the fees and the missing pay, they actually would still owe her about 50 bucks. Now they finally decide to start communicating with us, they say they are swearing out a warrant for theft by taking for cashing both checks. Do I really have anything to worry about here? Because I dont see where she has broken any laws, and like I said, they still owe us money.
Thanks for any help or insight you may be able to give.

[cyjeff]

They gave you checks.

You are allowed to cash them.

Here is what I would say... if they want to call the police, that's fine. If they were giving you knowingly worthless checks, that's illegal.

If they want to debate the amount of the checks, they will have to take you to civil court. Make sure you keep an accounting of everything you were owed.

[jk]

You did not have the right to cash both checks. Why the writer would not demand the first check be returned to them when the second check was written is beyond me but your wife knowingly accepted the second check as a replacement of the first check. Because of that, she had no right to cash both checks even if they actually owed her money.

[TheArgumentative]

According to the OP, the second cheque was given after the first cheque bounced.

[jk]

According to the OP, the second cheque was given after the first cheque bounced.

there was a claim of some errant stop payment on the first check. The second check was given as a replacement of the first check so effectively, the OP could only have one valid check. I think they might have stepped in the doo doo by cashing both checks.

[supertech]

they knowingly wrote her 2 different checks. yes the intention was that the second was a replacement for the first, but they bounced both of them. dont i have a legal right to cash checks written to me? do they have any right to take any kind of legal action against me?

[jk]

. dont i have a legal right to cash checks written to me?

you knew the check was a replacement. That means there was only 1 check effectively.

do they have any right to take any kind of legal action against me?

I believe they do.

[supertech]

If there was a stop payment, then why would her bank have cashed it? and when it was returned, it had a insufficient funds stamp on it.

im not sure if it matters, she has also been convicted of bouncing checks before

[LawResearcherMissy]

there was a claim of some errant stop payment on the first check. The second check was given as a replacement of the first check so effectively, the OP could only have one valid check. I think they might have stepped in the doo doo by cashing both checks.

Concur.

Cashing one or the other - as one was meant to replace the other - would have been fine. Cashing both, however, knowing that one was meant to replace the other, is not kosher.

I think the issuers have a pretty good case for theft.

If there was a stop payment, then why would her bank have cashed it? and when it was returned, it had a insufficient funds stamp on it.

If the stop payment order was made over the phone, it may have expired. As you note, however, it was originally declined for NSF.

This, however, is irrelevant. The second check was explicitly issued to replace the first check. The first check should have been destroyed or returned to the issuer.

im not sure if it matters, she has also been convicted of bouncing checks before

Irrelevant.

[supertech]

This, however, is irrelevant. The second check was explicitly issued to replace the first check. The first check should have been destroyed or returned to the issuer.

they were returned to my wife. she took them to the issuing bank. she only cashed one check at first and asked what to do with the other returned check and they told her to cash it or do whatever she wanted, that it was hers, a legal document, to do with as she pleased. so we figured we will never see any of the money they owe us or the overdraft charges they caused us, so we cashed it. i still dont see how that is illegal, but if so, what can they do?
also, even though the debt has been paid, is there anything charges or anything that can be done about this? it is a common problem with this person. are there no repercussions for constantly writing fraudulent checks?