We have a checking account for which the customer’s last-known address is in Colorado. Illinois law applies a three-year escheatment period, but Colorado law applies a five-year escheatment period. For reciprocal states like Colorado, should we use Illinois’s escheatment timeframe or the reciprocal state’s escheatment timeframe?

In this case, we recommend applying Colorado’s five-year presumed abandonment period to the account, since the customer’s last-known address is in Colorado.

The Illinois Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (Illinois RUUPA) establishes several rules to determine which state has priority to take custody of unclaimed property. The first priority is given to the state of the apparent owner’s last-known address in the holder’s records. Consequently, in most situations it will be clear from the property owner’s last-known address in your bank’s records whether Illinois or another state’s law applies. (The question of which state’s law applies becomes more complicated if you do not have a last-known address for the owner — for example, if you have multiple addresses or your records indicate that the address is temporary.)

For resources related to our guidance, please see:

  • Colorado Revised Statutes, C.R.S. § 38-13-207.5(1) (“Any demand, savings, or matured time deposit with a financial organization, including a deposit that is automatically renewable, and any funds paid toward the purchase of a share, a mutual investment certificate, or any other interest in a financial organization is presumed abandoned unless the owner, within five years, has:”)
  • Illinois RUUPA, 765 ILCS 1026/15-302 (“The administrator may take custody of property that is presumed abandoned, whether located in this State, another state, or a foreign country if:

(1) the last-known address of the apparent owner in the records of the holder is in this State

(2) the records of the holder do not reflect the identity or last-known address of the apparent owner, but the administrator has determined that the last-known address of the apparent owner is in this State.”)

  • Illinois RUUPA, 765 ILCS 1026/15-303 (“(a) Except as in subsection (b), if records of a holder reflect multiple addresses for an apparent owner and this State is the state of the most recently recorded address, this State may take custody of property presumed abandoned, whether located in this State or another state.

(b) If it appears from records of the holder that the most recently recorded address of the apparent owner under subsection (a) is a temporary address and this State is the state of the next most recently recorded address that is not a temporary address, this State may take custody of the property presumed abandoned.”)

  • Illinois RUUPA, 765 ILCS 1026/15-304(a) (“Except as in subsection (b) or Section 15-302 or 15-303, the administrator may take custody of property presumed abandoned, whether located in this State, another state, or a foreign country, if the holder is domiciled in this State or is this State or a governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality of this State, and

(1) another state or foreign country is not entitled to the property because there is no last-known address of the apparent owner or other person entitled to the property in the records of the holder; or

(2) the state or foreign country of the last-known address of the apparent owner or other person entitled to the property does not provide for custodial taking of the property.”)

  • Illinois RUUPA, 765 ILCS 1026/15-305 (“Except as in Section 15-302, 15-303, or 15-304, the administrator may take custody of property presumed abandoned whether located in this State or another state if:

(1) the transaction out of which the property arose took place in this State

(2) the holder is domiciled in a state that does not provide for the custodial taking of the property, except that if the property is specifically exempt from custodial taking under the law of the state of the holder's domicile, the property is not subject to the custody of the administrator; and

(3) the last-known address of the apparent owner or other person entitled to the property is unknown or in a state that does not provide for the custodial taking of the property, except that if the property is specifically exempt from custodial taking under the law of the state of the last-known address, the property is not subject to the custody of the administrator.”)