Okla. Stat. tit. 12A § 4A-102
Except as otherwise provided in Section 8 of this act, this Article applies to funds transfers defined in Section 4 of this act.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 4A-102
Oklahoma Code Comment
Article governs a funds transfer, except as provided in § 4A-108 . A funds transfer is a payment order or a series of payment orders by which an originator "transfers funds" to a beneficiary through the banking system by a series of debits and credits to accounts (although the originator can pay and the beneficiary can receive cash or other payment instead of an account being debited or credited). The funds transfer is completed when the beneficiary's bank accepts a payment order for the benefit of the beneficiary of the originator's payment order. § 4A-104(a).
Settlement for the payment order accepted by the beneficiary's bank is governed by § 4A-403 , and is an important subject. See Delbrueck & Co. v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co., 609 F.2d 1047 (2d Cir.1979) discussed in detail in the introductory commentary. However, failure to settle generally does not impact on the right of the beneficiary to payment. §§ 4A-404 and 4A-405. Settlement and the right of the beneficiary to payment involve an initial scope issue under Article 4A because not all the rules bearing on these subjects appear in Article 4A. For example, the rules of a funds transfer system may bear on the right of a beneficiary to payment under § 4A-405(d) or (e). However, generally, Article 4A is intended to be "self-contained", unless its provisions expressly indicate otherwise, such as the reference to the law determining when an obligation is satisfied in § 4A-405(b) or the reference to the law of agency in § 4A-202(a). See Official Comment to § 4A-102. But in a number of instances discussed here and elsewhere other law does play a part, including the law of contract (see, e.g., § 4A-212, which leaves to contract any liability for failure to accept a payment order), and the law of torts (see, e.g., § 4A-204, which uses the standard of ordinary care).
Federal Regulation J. 12 CFR 210 , is an additional law that comes into play in relation to settlement. See the Oklahoma Comment to § 4A-107 . Regulation CC, 12 CFR pt. 229, which implements the federal Expedited Funds Availability Act, 12 U.S.C. § 4001 et seq., is another such law which bears on the right of the beneficiary to use the funds transferred. As relevant to the context here, the federal statute and Regulation CC require that the proceeds of a wire transfer must be made available for withdrawal from the account on the business day after the funds are received. 12 U.S.C. § 4002(a)(1)(B) . "Receipt" does not occur until settlement occurs. Regulation CC § 229.10(b)(2) (payment in actuary and finally collected funds). When the transfer is by Fedwire or by CHIPS (Clearing House Interbank Payments System operated by the New York Clearing House), settlement usually occurs the same day the funds transfer is accepted by the beneficiary's bank. Thus under federal law availability may be due the next day. However, under Article 4A in many cases the beneficiary's bank will be obligated to pay the beneficiary on the day that it receives a payment order for the beneficiary. §§ 4A-401 and 4A-404. Accordingly, and as strange as it seems, this result under Article 4A may be preempted by the less protective federal rule. For a more extensive discussion, see Baxter and Bhala, The Inter-Relationship of Article Other Law, 45 Bus.Law. 1485 (June 1990 Special Issue).
Article 4A defines a "payment order" as an instruction of a sender to a receiving bank transmitted orally, electronically or in writing to pay or cause another bank to pay a fixed or determinable amount of money to a beneficiary if (1) there is no condition to payment other than time, (2) the receiving bank is to receive reimbursement from the sender, and (3) the instruction is transmitted directly to the receiving bank or an agent or funds transfer system. § 4A-103(a)(1).
The requirement that a payment order be to a "bank" (under § 4A-105 (a)(2), a commercial or savings bank, trust company, thrift or credit union) excludes wire transfers by Western Union and the like which, for the most part, are different in nature and in size from the large dollar commercial transfers included under Article 4A. § 4A-104, Official Comment 2. Moreover, there is well established law for such transactions outside of Article 4A. See the discussion of the Haviland case in the introductory commentary.
The requirement the instruction be unconditional divides payment orders under Article 4A from documentary instructions, such as those covered under Article 5 of the UCC in connection with letters of credit; the need to examine documents essentially is inconsistent with the expedited nature of a funds transfer. § 4A-104, Official Comment 3.
The requirement the sender reimburse the bank eliminates debit transfers where the sender of the order receives the payment and the debtor will reimburse the bank. Debit transfers may involve different considerations than credit transfers, which are the type of funds transfer covered under Article 4A, and this exclusion also serves to render those provisions of Regulation J. 12 CFR 210 , that govern debit transfers inapplicable. § 4A-104, Official Comment 4.
The last requirement - that the instruction go directly to a bank, agent or system, operates to exclude funds transfers pursuant to a credit card where the instruction to pay is delivered to or through the intended payee before transmission to the debtor's bank. § 4A-104, Official Comment 5. This requirement thus separates the rules in Article 4A from federal law on credit cards (see, e.g., 15 U.S.C. §§ 1642 - 1645 , 1666 - 1666i ) and also state law under 14A Oklahoma Statutes § 1-101 et seq. (Oklahoma Consumer Credit Code). Equally important, this requirement prevents Article 4A from covering payment by check (or draft) since a check or draft is first delivered to the payee. § 4A-104, Official Comment 5. However, all relationship between the check rules of the UCC and Article 4A is not eliminated by this provision.
To illustrate, suppose the beneficiary's bank accepts a payment order for the beneficiary but, due to clerical mistake, misreads the account balance and dishonors a check written by the beneficiary based on knowledge the funds transfer has arrived. Suppose the check was to pay for a valuable option, which due to the dishonor is lost? § 4A-404(a) may suggest the bank is not liable for the consequential damages unless the beneficiary had demanded the check be paid and had given the bank notice not only of the fact the option would be lost but of the magnitude of the loss. § 4A-404, Official Comment 2. However, under UCC § 4-402, there is a strong argument the bank is strictly liable for these damages without regard to these prerequisites, unless Article 4A supplies the relevant rule. Article 4A should be considered to supply the rule for a failure to execute a payment order by the beneficiary or to pay the beneficiary by cash or check, but the Official Comment to revised UCC § 4-402 states UCC § 4-402 should govern the wrongful dishonor of a check drawn by the beneficiary. For an argument to the contrary on the applicability of Article 4, see Baxter and Bhala, The Inter-Relationship of Article 4A with Other Law, 45 Bus.Law. 1485 (June 1990 Special Issue).