2006 Ohio Revised Code - 1304.69. (UCC 4A-302) Obligations of receiving bank in execution of payment order.

§ 1304.69. (UCC 4A-302) Obligations of receiving bank in execution of payment order.
 

(A)  Except as provided in divisions (B) to (D) of this section, if the receiving bank accepts a payment order pursuant to division (A) of section 1304.64 of the Revised Code, the bank has the following obligations in executing the order: 

(1) The receiving bank shall issue, on the execution date, a payment order complying with the sender's order and follow the sender's instructions concerning any intermediary bank or funds-transfer system to be used in carrying out the funds transfer, or the means by which payment orders are to be transmitted in the funds transfer. If the originator's bank issues a payment order to an intermediary bank, the originator's bank shall instruct the intermediary bank according to the instruction of the originator. An intermediary bank in the funds transfer is similarly bound by an instruction given to it by the sender of the payment order it accepts. 

(2) If the sender's instruction states that the funds transfer is to be carried out telephonically or by wire transfer or otherwise indicates that the funds transfer is to be carried out by the most expeditious means, the receiving bank shall transmit its payment order by the most expeditious available means and instruct any intermediary bank accordingly. If a sender's instruction states a payment date, the receiving bank shall transmit its payment order at a time and by means reasonably necessary to allow payment to the beneficiary on the payment date or as soon thereafter as is feasible. 

(B)  Unless otherwise instructed, a receiving bank executing a payment order may use any funds-transfer system if use of that system is reasonable in the circumstances, and issue a payment order to the beneficiary's bank or to an intermediary bank through which a payment order conforming to the sender's order can expeditiously be issued to the beneficiary's bank if the receiving bank exercises ordinary care in the selection of the intermediary bank. A receiving bank is not required to follow an instruction of the sender designating a funds-transfer system to be used in carrying out the funds transfer if the receiving bank, in good faith, determines that it is not feasible to follow the instruction or that following the instruction would unduly delay completion of the funds transfer. 

(C)  Unless division (A)(2) of this section applies or the receiving bank is otherwise instructed, the bank may execute a payment order by transmitting its payment order by first class mail or by any means reasonable in the circumstances. If the receiving bank is instructed to execute the sender's order by transmitting its payment order by a particular means, the receiving bank may issue its payment order by the means stated or by any means as expeditious as the means stated. 

(D)  Unless instructed by the sender, the receiving bank may not obtain payment of its charges for services and expenses in connection with the execution of the sender's order by issuing a payment order in an amount equal to the amount of the sender's order less the amount of the charges, and may not instruct a subsequent receiving bank to obtain payment of its charges in the same manner. 
 

HISTORY: 144 v H 221. Eff 10-23-91.

 

Official Comment

1. In the absence of agreement, the receiving bank is not obliged to execute an order of the sender. Section 4A-212. Section 4A-302 states the manner in which the receiving bank may execute the sender's order if execution occurs. Subsection (a)(1) states the residual rule. The payment order issued by the receiving bank must comply with the sender's order and, unless some other rule is stated in the section, the receiving bank is obliged to follow any instruction of the sender concerning which funds transfer system is to be used, which intermediary banks are to be used, and what means of transmission is to be used. The instruction of the sender may be incorporated in the payment order itself or may be given separately. For example, there may be a master agreement between the sender and receiving bank containing instructions governing payment orders to be issued from time to time by the sender to the receiving bank. In most funds transfers, speed is a paramount consideration. A sender that wants assurance that the funds transfer will be expeditiously completed can specify the means to be used. The receiving bank can follow the instructions literally or it can use an equivalent means. For example, if the sender instructs the receiving bank to transmit by telex, the receiving bank could use telephone instead. Subsection (c). In most cases the sender will not specify a particular means but will use a general terms such as "by wire" or "wire transfer" or "as soon as possible". These words signify that the sender wants a same-day transfer. In these cases, the receiving bank is required to use a telephone or electronic communication to transmit its order and is also required to instruct any intermediary bank to which it issues its order to transmit by similar means. Subsection (a)(2). In other cases, such as an automated clearing house transfer, a same-day transfer is not contemplated. Normally the sender's instruction or the context in which the payment order is received makes clear the type of funds transfer that is appropriate. If the sender states a payment date with respect to the payment order, the receiving bank is obliged to execute the order at a time and in a manner to meet the payment date if that is feasible. Subsection (a)(2). This provision would apply to many ACH transfers made to pay recurring debts of the sender. In other cases, involving relatively small amounts, time may not be an important factor and cost may be a more important element. Fast means, such as telephonic or electronic transmission, are more expensive than slow means such as mailing. Subsection (c) states that in the absence of instructions the receiving bank is given discretion to decide. It may issue its payment order by first class mail or by any means reasonable in the circumstances. Section 4A-305 states the liability of a receiving bank for breach of the obligations stated in section 4A-302. 

2. Subsection (b) concerns the choice of intermediary banks to be used in completing the funds transfer, and the funds transfer system to be used. If the receiving bank is not instructed about the matter, it can issue an order directly to the beneficiary's bank or can issue an order to an intermediary bank. The receiving bank also has discretion concerning use of a funds transfer system. In some cases it may be reasonable to use either an automated clearing house system or a wire transfer system such as Fedwire or CHIPS. Normally, the receiving bank will follow the instruction of the sender in these matters, but in some cases it may be prudent for the bank not to follow instructions. The sender may have designated a funds transfer system to be used in carrying out the funds transfer, but it may not be feasible to use the designated system because of some impediment such as a computer breakdown which prevents prompt execution of the order. The receiving bank is permitted to use an alternate means of transmittal in a good faith effort to execute the order expeditiously. The same leeway is not given to the receiving bank if the sender designates an intermediary bank through which the funds transfer is to be routed. The sender's designation of that intermediary bank may mean that the beneficiary's bank is expecting to obtain a credit from that intermediary bank and may have relied on that anticipated credit. If the receiving bank uses another intermediary bank the expectations of the beneficiary's bank may not be realized. The receiving bank could choose to route the transfer to another intermediary bank and then to the designated intermediary bank if there were some reason such as lack of a correspondent bank relationship or a bilateral credit limitation, but the designated intermediary bank cannot be circumvented. To do so violates the sender's instructions. 

3. The normal rule, under subsection (a)(1), is that the receiving bank, in executing a payment order, is required to issue a payment order that complies as to amount with that of the sender's order. In most cases the receiving bank issues an order equal to the amount of the sender's order and makes a separate charge for services and expenses in executing the sender's order. In some cases, particularly if it is an intermediary bank that is executing an order, charges are collected by deducting them from the amount of the payment order issued by the executing bank. If that is done, the amount of the payment order accepted by the beneficiary's bank will be slightly less than the amount of the originator's payment order. For example, originator, in order to pay an obligation of one million dollars ($1,000,000) owed to beneficiary, issues a payment order to originator's bank to pay one million dollars ($1,000,000) to the account of beneficiary in beneficiary's bank. Originator's bank issues a payment order to intermediary bank for one million dollars ($1,000,000) and debits originator's account for one million ten dollars ($1,000,010). The extra ten dollars ($10.00) is the fee of originator's bank. Intermediary bank executes the payment order of originator's bank by issuing a payment order to beneficiary's bank for nine hundred ninety-nine thousand nine hundred ninety dollars ($999,990), but under section 4A-402(c) is entitled to receive one million dollars ($1,000,000) from originator's bank. The ten dollar ($10.00) difference is the fee of intermediary bank. Beneficiary's bank credits beneficiary's account for nine hundred ninety-nine thousand, nine hundred ninety dollars ($999,990). When beneficiary's bank accepts the payment order of intermediary bank the result is a payment of nine hundred ninety nine thousand nine hundred ninety dollars ($999,990) from originator to beneficiary. Section 4A-406(a). If that payment discharges the one million dollar ($1,000,000) debt, the effect is that beneficiary has paid the charges of intermediary bank and originator has paid the charges of originator's bank. Subsection (d) of section 4A-302 allows intermediary bank to collect its charges by deducting them from the amount of the payment order, but only if instructed to do so by originator's bank. Originator's bank is not authorized to give that instruction to intermediary bank unless originator authorized the instruction. Thus, originator can control how the charges of originator's bank and intermediary bank are to be paid. Subsection (d) does not apply to charges of beneficiary's bank to beneficiary. 

In the case discussed in the preceding paragraph the ten dollar ($10.00) charge is trivial in relation to the amount of the payment and it may not be important to beneficiary how the charge is paid. But it may be very important if the one million dollar ($1,000,000) obligation represented the price of exercising a right such as an option favorable to originator and unfavorable to beneficiary. Beneficiary might well argue that it was entitled to receive one million dollars ($1,000,000). If the option was exercised shortly before its expiration date, the result could be loss of the option benefit because the requirement of one million dollars ($1,000,000) was not made before the option expired. Section 4A-406(c) allows originator to preserve the option benefit. The amount received by beneficiary is deemed to be one million dollars ($1,000,000) unless beneficiary demands the ten dollar ($10.00) and originator does not pay it.