Business

Status of a Holder in Due Course

Status of a Holder in Due Course

November 30
00:00 -0001

Status of a Holder in Due Course

Because being a holder in due course offers a significant amount of protection from the actions of other parties in the chain of negotiations for a given negotiable instrument, there are a number of requirements which must be fulfilled in order for a party to qualify as a holder in due course. These requirements are mostly there so as to prevent the status of being a holder in due course from being overly abused by parties seeking to perpetrate fraud and protect themselves from any lawsuits or defenses. 
These requirements include stipulations that: the negotiable instrument cannot have clear evidence of forgery, alteration, or other elements that might make it inauthentic; it must have been taken for value; it must have been taken in good faith; it must have been taken without any notice that it is dishonored, or there is an “uncured default,” or that it is overdue; it does not contain an unauthorized signature or has not been altered significantly; it must have been taken without notice that another party has a claim to the instrument; and it must have been taken without notice that any other party has attempted to defend itself against recoupment.
Each of these requirements is designed to ensure that the party claiming holder in due course status is not obtaining the negotiable instrument for fraudulent purposes or with fraudulent intent. To find out more information about each of these requirements and exactly how they need to be fulfilled, follow the link. 

Violations of HDC Doctrine
The holder in due course (HDC) doctrine is designed to protect holders from culpability in situations where they performed no wrongdoing, but might be affected by another party’s attempt at a defense because they hold the negotiable instruments being contested. But HDC doctrine has been violated a number of times, as it has been turned to fraudulent purposes. 
The most common practice of the 20th Century involved sellers making deals with low-income customers that would require those customers to give the sellers some form of promissory note or negotiable instrument. The sellers would then sell those promissory notes to banks and would gain a profit on them.
Because the banks, then, would have acquired those promissory notes in good faith and would fulfill all the other important elements of being holders in due course, they would be protected when the low-income customers would be unable to pay off those debts. Even if those low-income customers attempted a defense based on the fact that they were deceived by the sellers into believing that they could afford these debts, the banks would be protected thanks to their HDC status. 
This is not violation of HDC doctrine in the sense of outright law-breaking, but is instead violation of HDC doctrine in that it is a manipulation of the point and purpose of HDC doctrine. The Federal Trade Commission has since taken steps to attempt to combat this type of manipulative, deceptive practice, but it continues in a different form in the modern world. Click the link for more information about these manipulative violations of HDC doctrine and their current form in America.


Taking for Value
One of the requirements for a given holder to be deemed a holder in due course is for he or she to have taken the negotiable instrument in question for value, instead of as a gift or otherwise without making equal compensation to the party from which the holder received the negotiable instrument. There are five different possible ways of taking for value. 
The first way is if the current holder fulfills the promise he or she made when he or she obtained the negotiable instrument. If a negotiable instrument is exchanged for some kind of promised service, then the transaction is not considered to be “taking for value” until such a time as the promise is fulfilled. Until that point, the transaction is unequal and the recipient cannot be deemed a holder in due course. 
The second way to take for value is to obtain a security interest or other lien in the negotiable instrument without having obtained that lien through a judicial proceeding such as a bankruptcy sale. The third way to take for value is to have obtained the negotiable instrument as a payment for a preexisting debt such that the negotiable instrument is worth the same value as the debt. 
The fourth way to take for value is to obtain the negotiable instrument in exchange for another negotiable instrument of equal value, but likely of a different nature. The fifth and final way to take for value would be to obtain the negotiable instrument in exchange for an irrevocable obligation to a third party. To find out more about each of these five ways of taking for value and thereby attaining holder in due course status, follow the link.

Taking in Good Faith
Another requirement for being considered a holder in due course under commercial law is that the holder must have taken the negotiable instrument in good faith. This is one of the more important requirements for being considered a holder in due course, not in the sense of legality, but in the sense of the intent of HDC doctrine. 
The entire point of HDC doctrine is to protect those parties that had absolutely nothing to do with any wrongdoing surrounding a given negotiable instrument from attempts to seek restitution, as those parties have clearly done nothing that would require them to make reparations to an injured party. Taking in good faith is the requirement of the HDC doctrine that codifies this element, as it requires the holder to have obtained the negotiable instrument while having no part in illegitimate actions and while under the belief that the transaction as a whole was legitimate. 
A party cannot have taken the negotiable instrument in good faith if that party has strong reason to suspect that the negotiable instrument has somehow been made inauthentic or manipulated illegitimately. For instance, if the would-be holder perceives that the instrument has a seemingly forged signature, then that would-be holder has a duty not to go through with the transaction. If the party does go through with the transaction, then the party would have lost any “good faith” status, as would be judged in a court.
Similarly, if the negotiable instrument is clearly obtained under questionable circumstances, such as a deal made in a back alley in which a $700 promissory note is exchanged for $50, then there is good reason to believe that the negotiable instrument was not taken in good faith. 
If, however, there was nothing to have clued the holder in to any fraudulent elements of the transaction and that holder treats the transaction properly under commercial law, then that holder will have taken the negotiable instrument in good faith. For more information about taking in good faith and some of the problems surrounding this practice, click the link.


Taking Without Notice
A further requirement for gaining status as a holder in due course is that the current holder must have taken the negotiable instrument without notice as to any of the myriad forms of wrongdoing or warning that might have clued that holder in to the fact that the negotiable instrument was not fully supported or was inauthentic. For example, if the holder received a notice to the effect that the negotiable instrument bore a forged signature and yet went through with the transaction anyway, the holder would have forfeited all possible holder in due course status, as he or she would have taken the negotiable instrument with notice. 
Such notice need not take as overly blatant of a form as this, however. Instead, such notice could take the form simply of a notice that another party to the negotiable instrument has attempted to mount a defense against paying for the negotiable instrument. If the party has been successfully notified of any of these things in a timely manner that would allow that party to take action and back out of the transaction, or at least perform a deeper investigation, then that party cannot claim holder in due course protection, as it could have remedied the situation on its own.
The problems of this particular requirement lie in that it is possible that the third parties to whom negotiable instruments are sold will never have the appropriate information given to them. To find out more about the notices that might invalidate a party’s claim to being a holder in due course, follow the link.
Share

About Author

admin

admin

Related Articles

Business News

Google and IBM Discover Massive New Market Opportunity Mamadou Ndiaye grew up in the impoverished nation of Senegal.
Deep Fried: Burger King Twitter Hacked Deep Fried: Burger King Twitter Hacked Just two weeks after traces of horse meat were found in beef patties at a Burger King supply center in Europe, the fast-food chain’s Twitter was hacked.
Berkshire and 3G Capital Purchase Heinz for $23 Billion Berkshire and 3G Capital Purchase Heinz for $23 Billion Buffet, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, announced on Thursday that it plans to purchase the food giant for roughly $23 billion, adding Heinz Ketchup to the conglomerate’s stable of respected brands.
Martha Stewart Back in Court Again Martha Stewart Back in Court Again On Tuesday, the home decorating and banking icon appeared before the New York State Supreme court to defend her choice to sign a contract with J.
Young Adults are Too Broke for Loans Young Adults are Too Broke for Loans Young adults are facing less debt than they were 10 years ago, but that is not necessarily a good thing.
Lawsuit Alleges Budweiser Waters-down its Beer Lawsuit Alleges Budweiser Waters-down its Beer Beer drinkers across the United States have accused Anheuser-Busch of watering down its Michelob, Budweiser and other beer brands, in class-action suits that seek tens of millions in damages.
CNBC to Purchase “Nightly Business Report” CNBC to Purchase “Nightly Business Report” “Nightly Business Report,” the inventive public television series that has come into financial troubles in recent years, attracted a new deep-pocketed commercial owner, the 24-hour news and business cable channel CNBC, an element of Comcast’s NBC Universal.
Google Launches Touchscreen Chromebook Google Launches Touchscreen Chromebook Google on Thursday introduced a high-resolution Chrome OS portable computer equipped with a touchscreen.
Investigations Continue Into Plywood from China Investigations Continue Into Plywood from China On November 9, 2012, the International Trade Commission (USITC) announced that continuing investigations allege that hardwood plywood from China was subsidized and sold for less than fair value in the United States.
Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Sign Memorandum with Two Indian Authorities Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Sign Memorandum with Two Indian Authorities On September 27, 2012, the US Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission signed a memorandum of understanding with the Government of India Ministry of Corporate Affairs as well as the Competition Commission of India.
Another Taiwan Manufacturer Pleads Guilty to Price-Fixing Another Taiwan Manufacturer Pleads Guilty to Price-Fixing On September 25, 2012, the Department of Justice announced that the vice chairman of a Taiwan aftermarket auto lights manufacturer pled guilty to an international price-fixing conspiracy.
CME Group Software Engineer Guilty of Stealing Trade Secrets CME Group Software Engineer Guilty of Stealing Trade Secrets On September 19, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office in the Northern District of Illinois reported that Chunlai Yang pleaded guilty of two counts theft of trade secrets after working for CME Group for 11 years.
Economists Predict Meager Growth in 2011 Economists Predict Meager Growth in 2011 A number of businesses and financial analysts predict that the United States’ economy will grow only slightly in 2011, a bleaker forecast that was offered in July, when most entity’s called for a stronger improvement.
End of the Road for Steuben Crystal End of the Road for Steuben Crystal Steuben Glass, a name that once evoked images of prestige and sophistication, appears to be vanishing for good.

Guide To: Business Lawyers

Guide to Finding Business Lawyer Guide to Finding Business Lawyer How do I find a Business Lawyer?Business lawyers are essential for commercial enterprises to ensure that they remain knowledgeable of the laws regulating their business and protecting their assets from liability.
Guide to Finding Tax Lawyer Guide to Finding Tax Lawyer How do I find a Tax Lawyer?Tax lawyers specialize in helping clients who need guidance in navigating the complex tax codes of the United States and local state taxes.
Guide to Finding Bankruptcy Lawyer Guide to Finding Bankruptcy Lawyer Questions to ask, Fees, Preparing for appointment.