ISP Information:
Pronounced "skuzzy," this is a standard data pathway used mostly for hard drives and CD-ROM drives; but it was also a common interface for scanners and even printers at one point. It is the fastest (and the most flexible) method of interfacing with hard drives. It comes in numerous varieties, and is mainly used in servers and high-end workstations. SCSI drives are much more expensive than IDE drives, but SCSI drives can
ISP Glossary:
SCSI - In article , bobward@verizon.net (Bob Ward) writes:| On 7 Oct 2004 05:53:49 GMT, ddl@danlan.*com (Dan Lanciani) wrote:|| >In article , bobward@verizon.net (Bob Ward) writes:| >| On 7 Oct 2004 02:50:07 GMT, ddl@danlan.*com (Dan Lanciani) wrote:| >|| >| >| >| >The other "transgressions," i.e., abusing Check 21 as an excuse to require| >| >your account to allow ACH debits and to deny the return of legally meaningful| >| >items are not a matter of speculation at all. They are specific actions that| >| >my own banks have taken with respect to my own accounts (4/4 for ACH, 1/4 so| >| >far for return). Based on other posters' experiences and an article at| >|| >|| >| You are claiming that a "substitute check" is not "Legally| >| meaningful"?| >| >No, I am claiming that my bank is not returning substitute checks. They| >are returning images (front only) which are not substitute checks and| >therefore not legally proof of anything. Based on your comments here and| >in other posts it appears that you may be under the impression that any| >check image provided by the bank is a legal substitute check. I do not| >believe that this is the case under the current law, although a number| >of consumer groups have suggested that the law should be changed in this| >respect. If you are aware that such a change has been made I'd like to| >know the details.| >|| Have you read the FAQs regarding Check21?Yes, along with the various (and certainly varying in quality) papers from(supposedly) consumer advocacy groups, proposed changes to the law, sometranscripts that purported to be the deliberations from when the billwas being created, and of course parts (but not all) of the bill itself.I've been reading about Check 21 for a year...| There is quite specific| information there regarding what a legal "substitute check" consists| of,Yes, I'm aware of that.| so, no, I'm not under the impression that any image provided by| the bank is a legal substitute check.I was confused by your comment above, since I never claimed that substitutechecks were not legally significant. I was also misled by your responseto another poster who mentioned that the bank could charge you for a substitutecheck. You replied that you could download images for free, without makingthe distinction that those did not constitute substitute checks.| However, in many cases, it is| all that will be necessary to convince a creditor that you do have| access to, and can provide a legal substitute check when push comes to| shove.Now unlike my previous comments, this *is* cynical speculation: companiesare going to catch on to the difference. If their goal is to create enoughobstacles to make you decide it isn't worth your bother to pursue the matterthey will just ignore the non-legally-equivalent instrument and stonewall.There is very little downside risk to them. Particularly if the amount ofthe dispute is less than the cost to get the substitute check (N.B. none ofmy banks have disclosed this number yet.) walking away might be the smartthing to do.| >| That's another example.| >| >I must have missed the first one(s)...| >| >| You are making it up as you go along, and not| >| doing a very good job of it.| >| >Since I'm making this up as I go along you should have no trouble naming| >a bank that will allow me to block ACH debits and one that has committed| >to returning legal substitute checks. (They do not have to be one and| >the same bank.) Don't bother naming a bank that still returns cancelled| >checks as I already have two. It's the commitment to returning the legal| >substitute checks once the cancelled checks are no longer available that's| >important. (N.B. The second challenge shouldn't be all that hard since| >even the standard Check 21 brochure suggests that such banks exist.)| >| > Dan Lanciani| > ddl@danlan.*com||| Since Check 21 has nothing to do with the ability to block ACH debits,| I do't know why you are dragg
|
