I was wondering if the hippa process will work in a state like Arizona that does not view restricted endorsement as legally binding? I heard that Arizona does not view restricted endorsement as legally binding from SassyinAz and was not sure how that relates to the HIPPA process.

The endorsement on the back of the money order is a "for deposit only" restriction, and is NOT considered a "restrictive endorsement" as covered in State or other regulations because their is no CONDITIONAL clause attached to the endorsement.

The "for deposit only" endorsement is covered and allowed under State banking rules.

Wonderful. Thank You for the reply. I will be sending out the dispute to CRA tomorrow, to start the process.