[OT] Re: Best practice for periodic key change?

[Jerome Baum]

On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 22:47, Jerome Baum <jerome at jeromebaum.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 22:38, MFPA <expires2011 at ymail.com> wrote:
>
>> As for the meaning of the date, whether it is supposed to mean the
>>
> date the signature was written or the date the instruction to pay
>> becomes effective or simply the date the cheque is issued to the payee
>> is unclear to me - and probably varies around the world. UK banks have
>> told me all three versions at various times. The one I heard
>> originally (and most often over the years) is the effective date of
>> the instruction to pay. YMMV.
>>
>
> I would trust the fine print over any of these versions. That's what I
> meant with banks being incompetent.  I might read through my fine print
> later to find out. If I do, I'll post here.
>

Per Art. 1 Nr. 5 ScheckG (German law regarding checks), the date on the
check is the date of issuing. Per Art. 28 there is no post-dating.

-- 
Jerome Baum

tel +49-1578-8434336
email jerome at jeromebaum.com
-- 
PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A
PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20110507/ec7b4ef8/attachment.htm>