'" (50 Cal.App.3d at p. 956.) Another jurisdiction interpreting Uniform Commercial Code section 4104, subdivision (1)(e), similarly has looked to the relationship of the parties rather than applying a strict standard that a "customer" have an account with the bank in his or her name. ( Columbian Peanut Company v. Frosteg (5th Cir. 1973) 472 F.2d 476.) The Kendall court evaluated the relationship of the individual plaintiffs to the corporate account and concluded that plaintiffs were as much "customers" of the bank within the contemplation of the statute as was the corporation.

Our case therefore differs factually from the two cases offered by Kaiperm. ( Littky Mallon v. Mich. Nat. Bank of Detroit (1980) 94 Mich. App. 29 [ 287 N.W.2d 359]; Columbian Peanut Company v. Frosteg (5th Cir. 1973) 472 F.2d 476.) In those cases the parties had established a relationship of customer and bank by virtue of an agreement to collect, a standing account and a course of dealing.

The common law and the case law under the code concur that, if payor bank and drawer are equally innocent, a payor bank is bound, at its peril, to determine the genuineness of the instrument and its indorsements. ( Hardex-Steubenville Corp. v. Western Pa. Nat. Bank (1971) 446 Pa. 446 [ 285 A.2d 874]; Columbian Peanut Company v. Frosteg (5th Cir. 1973) 472 F.2d 476; Security Commercial Sav. Bank of San Diego v. Southern Trust Commerce Bank (1925) 74 Cal.App. 734 [ 241 P. 945].) Absent its ratification or negligence (Com.

as between the drawer of a check and the bank upon which it is drawn the latter is bound at its peril to determine the genuineness of the endorsement upon which it is paid; it cannot . . . charge against the drawer's account a check payable to a named payee or his order and paid upon a forged endorsement. The Columbian Peanut Co. v. Frosteg, 472 F.2d 476, 480 (5th Cir. 1973); Massey-Ferguson, Inc. v. Fargo Nat'l Bank, 270 F. Supp. 227, 230 (D.N.D. 1967); Dana v. Old Colony Trust Co., 245 Mass. 347, 349 (1923). This rule applies even in those instances where the unauthorized endorsement has been guaranteed by a collecting or intermediary bank.

Ordinarily a bank cannot charge a forged check to the depositor's account but rather it must pay out of its own fund. See N.J.S.A. 12A:3-404; 12A:3-407; Columbian Peanut Co. v. Frosteg, 472 F.2d 476 (5th Cir.), reh. denied, 474 F.2d 1347, cert. denied, 414 U.S. 824, 94 S.Ct. 126, 38 L.Ed.2d 57 (1973). However, the bank is relieved from liability where its payment of the forged check is caused by the negligence of its depositor and where the bank is free from negligence.