You generally describe such programs as follows: "[A] university accepts money from students and sometimes from faculty and staff and, in turn, issues a card to each You also inform us that Southern Methodist University, a private university, has such a program. In addition, we have received a brief from the University of Texas stating that it has several debit card programs. First, you ask whether the issuance of debit cards amounts to the sale of checks under the Sale of Checks Act, V. Second, you ask whether an entity which issues debit cards acts as a bank and is required to obtain a bank charter.
|Country:||Central African Republic|
|Published (Last):||6 January 2010|
|PDF File Size:||18.68 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.9 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
You generally describe such programs as follows: "[A] university accepts money from students and sometimes from faculty and staff and, in turn, issues a card to each You also inform us that Southern Methodist University, a private university, has such a program. In addition, we have received a brief from the University of Texas stating that it has several debit card programs.
First, you ask whether the issuance of debit cards amounts to the sale of checks under the Sale of Checks Act, V. Second, you ask whether an entity which issues debit cards acts as a bank and is required to obtain a bank charter. Third, you ask whether the foregoing entities are statutorily authorized to issue debit cards to students, faculty and staff.
We have received briefs from all of the above universities arguing that their respective debit card programs do not amount to the sale of checks or unauthorized banking and that the institutions are authorized to issue such cards. As we read your request, we understand that you are only interested in those debit card programs with the following features: A student, faculty member or staff person deposits a certain amount in an account with the university, and receives a card or perhaps encoded information on a preexisting identification card that identifies the account.
The cardholder presents the card when making a purchase from a university vendor or, in some cases, third-party vendors operating concessions on campus pursuant to a contract with the university.
When a purchase is made, the cashier uses the card to identify the account and determine whether the account balance is sufficient. After the purchase is made, the amount of the purchase is automatically deducted from the account.
Because the purchase may not be made with the card if the account balance is insufficient, it is impossible to overdraw the account. We limit our discussion to the foregoing type of debit card program. We do not address "vend stripe" cards  or cards involving accounts with third parties.
The term "person" is defined in section 2 a of the act to mean "any individual, partnership, association, joint stock association, trust, or corporation, but does not include the United States Government or the government of this state. The term "sell" means "to sell, to issue, or to deliver a check. The term "check" means "any check, draft, money order, personal money order, or other instrument for the transmission or payment of money.
We believe that it is unlikely that a court would conclude, however, that a debit card program like the one you describe runs afoul of the act. See id. The state universities do not appear even to fall within this definition. A state university is not an individual, partnership, association, joint stock association, trust or corporation as required by section 2 a.
See Rainey v. Malone, S. Curtis Elec. Of course, the same would not be true in the case of a private university. In defining the term "check" to mean "any check, draft, money order, personal money order, or other instrument for the transmission or payment of money," see id. Checks, drafts, money orders, and personal money orders are written instruments, and the term "instrument" itself is commonly understood to refer to a written document. The debit card program you describe does not involve the sale of a written instrument.
We base this conclusion on section 12 of the act which provides: 14 Each licensee shall be liable for the payment of all checks which he sells, in whatever form and whether directly or through an agent, as the maker or drawer thereof according to the negotiable instrument laws of this state; and a licensee who sells a check, whether directly or through an agent, upon which he is not designated as maker or drawer shall nevertheless have the same liabilities with respect thereto as if he had signed the same as the drawer thereof.
See Bus. The debit card program you describe does not involve the sale of negotiable instruments. We are not aware of a Texas statute which defines the term "bank" or "banking. It is clear from Texas case law, however, that no one feature defines a bank. The term "bank" now by reason of the development and expansion of the banking business does not lend itself to an exact definition.
Zeiss, S. Furthermore, authority from other jurisdictions suggests that an entity is not necessarily a bank just because it engages in certain acts that are typical of banks; rather one must look at the activities of the entity as a whole. See, e. Exercise of all these functions is not necessary, nor does exercise of certain of them necessarily render a corporation a bank. We do not believe that a court would conclude that a university that offers a debit card program such as the one you describe among its many and various activities engages in banking.
The cards in that program could be used to pay for goods and services and to make cash withdrawals from automated teller machines "ATMs" on and off campus operated by a private bank. Relying in part on a federal appeals court decision holding that the payment of a cash withdrawal from an ATM constitutes payment of a check, Illinois ex rel.
Lignoul v. First, Illinois ex rel. Lignoul dealt with whether a cash withdrawal from an ATM constituted "branch banking" within the meaning of the National Bank Act, 12 U. We do not read that case to hold that an ATM withdrawal, or the use of any other card, necessarily constitutes payment of a check for purposes of section 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
Indeed, the primary case upon which Illinois ex rel. Smith, F. We also believe that the Florida opinion is inapposite with respect to the question whether Texas universities that offer debit card programs engage in banking. The type of debit card program you ask about does not permit cardholders to make cash withdrawals from their accounts much less allow them to make cash withdrawals from ATMs operated by a private bank.
Private universities, such as Southern Methodist University, are generally organized as nonprofit corporations.
The Texas Non-Profit Corporation Act defines the powers of nonprofit corporations expansively: "each corporation shall have power For this reason, we believe that private universities are authorized to operate debit card programs, provided that the programs are consistent with the educational mission set forth in their corporate charters  and do not violate the Sale of Checks Act or constitute unauthorized banking.
Section We do not believe that this provision expressly authorizes debit card programs. At most, this language acknowledges the practice at many universities of holding student money for safekeeping.
Furthermore, as you point out, this provision does not authorize public universities to retain the deposits of faculty and staff. For these reasons, we do not believe that section Austin State University, see id. In this case, provisions which broadly authorize state universities to provide student services, see Educ.
In sum, although we have found no statute which expressly authorizes a state university to operate a debit card program, we believe that it is likely that a court would probably construe the broad powers of a board of regents to impliedly authorize a state university do to so.
D.M.329 04 TESTO PDF
Nizilkree The shears that are excluded from the requirements of this standard are slitting-rotary, nibblers; coil slitters; portable hand tools; rotary-blade slitters and shears; iron workers; alligator; angle, d. La tutela della festo e sicurezza della… Leggi tutto. It describes the hazards generated by such machines and states the protective measures to be incorporated into such machines. This standard specifies the safety requirements for the design, construction, and maintenance including installation, dismantling and transport of transfer machines.
Opinion of the Texas Attorney General, No. DM-329 (March 9, 1995)
Meztigar Argentina: Buenos Aires This standard applies to machines with a work envelope equal to or greater than two cubic meters 2 m3 or two meters of linear axis travel, or where personnel are regularly required to enter into the working envelope to perform work or tasks. The ironworkers or combinations that are excluded from the requirements of this standard are: The requirements of this standard do not apply to machines with a work envelope less than two cubic meters 2 m3 or two meters of linear axis travel. This standard specifies the safety requirements for the design, construction, operation and maintenance including installation, dismantling, and transport of machining centers and automatic numerically controlled milling, drilling and boring machines. Excluded from the requirements of this standard are NC milling, drilling, and boring machines where manual control is used only to set the machine for automatic production.
DM 329 MCM Days