There are lots of reasons (see elsewhere here) but it gets even worse if they are company cheques, where you:

* Can't be sure if they have enough signatures (many need two)

* Cannot use a cheque guarantee card

* If the person giving you the cheque is being naughty with the company's money, you're much more at risk of being treated as receiving stolen property...

Yep.

It looks very likely that someone will become unwillingly famous because of this over the next year. I think (hope) they will be acquitted, or have the charges dropped before it comes to court, but they shouldn't have ended up in this position and they've already had to come out to all their family and friends etc.

I can understand in this case why they took the cheques, but all this would have been avoided if they'd said 'cash only' years ago.

And, in general, about two thirds of the stopped/bounced cheques people have shown to me have been company cheques.

Update, not least because someone's just pointed at this: They were acquitted, but only after a retrial. They didn't end up, as far as we can tell, splashed over the papers, but they still had over a year of absolute hell. Cheques - just say no.