Propose a change

Title 34.1 Uniform Commercial Code

Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.

Change 1

What to do with it
As published

34.1-4.A-203. Unenforceability of certain verified payment orders.

(a) If an accepted payment order is not, under section 34.1-4.A-202(a), an authorized order of a customer identified as sender, but is effective as an order of the customer pursuant to section 34.1-4.A-202(b), the following rules apply: (i) By express written agreement, the receiving bank may limit the extent to which it is entitled to enforce or retain payment of the payment order; (ii) The receiving bank is not entitled to enforce or retain payment of the payment order if the customer proves that the order was not caused, directly or indirectly, by a person (1) entrusted at any time with duties to act for the customer with respect to payment orders or the security procedure, or (2) who obtained access to transmitting facilities of the customer or who obtained, from a source controlled by the customer and without authority of the receiving bank, information facilitating breach of the security procedure, regardless of how the information was obtained or whether the customer was at fault. Information includes any access device, computer software, or the like. (b) This section applies to amendments of payment orders to the same extent it applies to payment orders.

Your change, as a redline

34.1-4.A-203. Unenforceability of certain verified payment orders.

(a) If an accepted payment order is not, under section 34.1-4.A-202(a), an authorized order of a customer identified as sender, but is effective as an order of the customer pursuant to section 34.1-4.A-202(b), the following rules apply: (i) By express written agreement, the receiving bank may limit the extent to which it is entitled to enforce or retain payment of the payment order; (ii) The receiving bank is not entitled to enforce or retain payment of the payment order if the customer proves that the order was not caused, directly or indirectly, by a person (1) entrusted at any time with duties to act for the customer with respect to payment orders or the security procedure, or (2) who obtained access to transmitting facilities of the customer or who obtained, from a source controlled by the customer and without authority of the receiving bank, information facilitating breach of the security procedure, regardless of how the information was obtained or whether the customer was at fault. Information includes any access device, computer software, or the like. (b) This section applies to amendments of payment orders to the same extent it applies to payment orders.

One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".

Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.

A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.

Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.

Sign in to file it