The IAS Court properly rejected plaintiff's claim that its request to defendant for previous bank statements and cancelled checks constituted a "report" to defendant under UCC 4-406 U.C.C. (4), which requires a writing (see, Woods v. MONY Legacy Life Ins. Co., 84 N.Y.2d 280, 282) clearly identifying the items claimed to have been improperly paid (see, Pelham Family Servs. v. Chemical Bank, Sup Ct, Westchester County, Feb. 7, 1992, Nicolai, J., index No. 1866/90, citing, inter alia, Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Fulton Natl. Bank, 108 Ga. App. 356, 133 S.E.2d 43, and American Bldg. Maintenance Co. v. Federation Bank Trust Co., 213 F. Supp. 412). As the IAS Court found, there is not so much as a "hint" that any such notice was given within the allowable one-year period, and the failure to do so constitutes a complete defense to the action (see, Woods v. MONY Legacy Life Ins. Co., supra, at 286), including plaintiff's common-law causes of action for negligence and breach of warranty (see, Prudential-Bache Sec. v. Citibank, 73 N.Y.2d 263, 272-273).
Concur — Lerner, P. J., Sullivan, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.