Thanks for reading.

Unfortunately, there is no vehicle for notifying the Originator of successfully processed transactions from the RDFI. However, your ODFI or 3rd Party Processor may be able to help you.

Most ODFIs or TPPs have a reporting function that will show you Settled transactions. Of course it is important to remember that that is mo guarantee that it won’t be returned later.

I hope that helps,
ACHGuy

Just found your site today and was wondering if you can help. I am aware that the return file includes failed ACH’s. Are successful ACH’s also returned? Are there any industry standards/guidelines around success, not just failures? If I want a financial institution to return all (both success and fail) or only success, how do I ask for that?

Thanks for you insight.

I really liked this blog and got lot knowledge about ACH.

I have basic question about the ACH types.

1) How do I identify if ACH is Push(Money Send by me to the one I owe) or Pull (Money requested by the one I Owe to my Account) ?
2) Are ACH-PPD always Pull ?
3) How do i identify Push/Pull transaction in my Bank Statement?

Thanks,

For Stop Payment transactions, the item to which the Stop Pay Order relates, should not be posting first. However, it may be in a status that called Soft Post or Memo Post…this means that the transaction has been received and is in line to be posted to your account, but has to wait for normal processing. Once it has been returned, you should not see anything of the transaction on your account.

That being said, I would recommend checking online after regular processing has occurred and then if it still isn’t right, contacting your bank. Unfortunately, it seems that just about every bank and credit union has their own way of doing things internally and I cannot say for sure what your bank’s policy/procedure might be.

I am hopeful that you’ll see what you expected to see after processing has taken place.

I wish you luck,
ACHGuy

Welcome to my blog. Glad to hear you like it.

I’m not completely clear whether you are referring to TEL transactions (wherein the authorization to initiate an ACH transaction is acquired over the telephone) or a Check-by-Phone situation where persmission to pay is given over the phone which results in a physical check being printed and presented for payment (signature line would read something to the effect of “Signature on File”, so I’ll address both.

Let’s talk about Check-by-Phone first. Check-by-Phone falls under Check Law (Check out: http://www.sheshunoff.com/products/Brady-on-Bank-Checks%3A-The-Law-of-Bank-Checks.html). Check law allows for these types of Remotely Created Checks/Drafts or RCCs/RCDs. I’m not a check law expert nor a lawyer, heck I don’t even play one on the Internet, but I do know 2 things: 1) RCCs allow for use of “Signature on File” or some such text on the signature line – meaning no Account Holder signature required and 2) I don’t like these types of transactions. They tend to be prone to fraud.

On the TEL front, still no signature required. As we know, every ACH transaction requires a signed or similarly authenticated authorization. TEL falls under the similarly authenticated part. During your telephone process, you should be authenicating the identity of the customer and either recording or sending a notice of the transaction (for one-time/single transactions) or recording the exchange for recurring TEL transactions. Check out: Page OR 19 – Subsection 2.5.15 Specific Provisions for TEL Entries or for a bigger picture and full details on TEL, Chapter 47 (Page OG 205) in the 2011 NACHA Operating Rules and Guidelines. And of course, don’t forget the new rules for Recurring TEL on page ORxlviii – in the Supplement #2.

With all that being said, here’s my bottom line: No signature required. None.

I hope that helps,
ACHGuy

Great info on this site and if you can answer this one for me you will be my new Hero!

Thanks and welcome to my blog, I’m glad you like.

It sounds like you are going to end up processing all transactions through 1 ODFI, vs. maintaining relationships with 2 ODFIs. That is the smart thing to do. So, then the question, do you need to notify the ODFI? The short answer is yes. But let me explain a little.

You don’t specify which ODFI you want to notify, so let me tackle it from both sides:

You will need to notify the surviving ODFI as you may run into transaction limits with them. You want to make sure they are aware that you will be processing X number of additional transactions each month and that the value of those transactions will grow too. That ODFI may want to review your account with them (for underwriting/risk purposes) and just make sure that all is OK and that they can comfortably adjust your limits. The last thing you want is to run up against your limits when you try to process all transactions for the first time.

You will need to notify the ODFI (the one that’s going away) as you will want to be sure to close out that account (see the agreement on how to do that). Also, they may have a reserve on file, they may want you to maintain funds on account for so many days (to allow for returns, etc., this is a risk consideration), they may offer you a great deal to process with them. There are a number of reasons.

Some additional advice, you will want to make sure (just in case) that you can access all the authorizations from the other company, should an RDFI requests one and you will want to make sure that you notify your new customers of the new name they should expect to see on their statement. Inevitably, some will see a different name and have no idea their insurance company changed names. Expect some amount of returns (that’s also another reason to talk with the surviving ODFI – make them aware of additional volume and possible returns even if a spike is temporary).

I hope this helps,
ACHGuy