we also use pre-printed checks, pre-numbered. we use the special micr ink in a laser printer, and it works great. No issues at all.
It was a PAIN getting our checks certified by the bank when we switched over - they demanded perfection in placement of account numbers, etc. I wish we had gone the "forgiveness before permission" route, because we spent months going back and forth with the bank, and since then as I investigate checks that come to us, i see account # placement varying wildly beyond what our bank allowed from us.
Keith
It was a PAIN getting our checks certified by the bank when we switched over - they demanded perfection in placement of account numbers, etc. I wish we had gone the "forgiveness before permission" route, because we spent months going back and forth with the bank, and since then as I investigate checks that come to us, i see account # placement varying wildly beyond what our bank allowed from us.
Keith
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Waffqle <waffqle@...> wrote:
>
> We have pre-numbered forms with a nice background/watermark that we just
> print over using a laser printer. We do us MICR. I would suggest it. It's
> not particularly expensive and you dont need a special printer or anything.
> Gives you flexibility too. If your bank info changes or anything, you don't
> need new forms. Just update Epicor and you're off to the races.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Mark Wonsil <mark_wonsil@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > We print on lasercheck and then run them through the copier with a
> > background image of a check and a not negotiable watermark on it. Fast, no
> > change to the forms, and they're already separated.
> >
> > Mark W.
> > On Aug 25, 2011 5:24 PM, "Keith Mailloux" <keith.mailloux@...
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > We currently print our AP checks on pre-printer 2 part forms using a
> > heavy
> > duty dot matrix printer. We would like to retire the old gal and wondered
> > what other people are doing laser printing of checks. We prefer
> > pre-numbered
> > so we do not have to fuss with micr toner. We also need to keep so
> > semblance
> > of a duplicate for audit purposes.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions, I search the archives and the topic has not been raised
> > in years best I can tell.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > >
> > > Keith Mailloux
> > > Ferguson Perforating
> > >
> > > 9. 05.606 - and feeling the pain
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> > > privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,
> > > please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this
> > > e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this
> > > information by a person other than the intended recipient is
> > > unauthorized and may be illegal.
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Waffqle Driggers*
> *High End Dev, System Design, Profit Drinking
> *
> *:: 904.962.2887*
> *:: waffqle@...*
> *:: NO FAXES*
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>