ARGUMENT AGAINST LATE PRESENTATION

QUERY FROM SH.
Subject: Argument against late-presentation

Dear Nguyen and Abrar,

I'm sorry to bother you again.
I'm not sure whether you have had similar experience below:
There was a set of docs which were available at our counter. We thought it O.K. and send it to the issuing bank. But we received the issuing bank's refusal advice citing the discrepancy "late presentation". The fact was the beneficiary made presentation at our counter on the last date of the presentation deadline (say, May 24,2011) while we send the docs the next date to the issuing bank (i.e. May 25, 2011), but we forgot to certify the real date when the beneficiary made the presentation in our cover letter.

I feel very embarrased , but is it still possible to reply to the issuing bank that the docs were actually presented on xxx within the deadline? Is there any ICC opinion on such an issue?

Thanks and best regards
SH.
——-

FROM MR. OLD MAN

Dear Sh.,

Below is my answer to a similar question posted in www.letterofcreditforum.com in 2009.
Hoping it is of your help.

Quote
Covering schedule is not a document required under L/C and does not form part of the documents to be examinined, hence, the issuing bank should not raise the discrepancy " Late presentation " based on the date of the covering schedule

No discrepancy if there is a certification in the covering schedule certifying that all documents presented are complying with the credit terms and conditions, or there is a statement stating the date the documents presented, which is within the L/C validity and/or the last day for presentation.

Hereunder are some ICC related opinions:

R373
"Where a schedule is dated after the latest permitted date of presentation and/or expiry date , a statement certifying that the terms and conditions have been complied with will be sufficient evidence of presentation within the expiry date and/or last date for presentation."

R480
"Where such statement(s) do not appear on the schedule and an issuing bank rejects for credit expired and/or late presentation a message from the negotiating bank confirming compliance with the date(s) will be sufficient evidence for the issuing bank to honour the documents."
Unquote

Best regards,
Nguyen Huu Duc
———

FROM ABRAR

Hi Sh.,

I would not have anything more to add to Nguyen’s excellent comments below.
In the given case, I would question on what basis, or from what calculation reference point, the issuing bank is able to assert that late presentation has occurred? Especially so, since in any case, the nominated bank would have up to 5 banking days, and the protection under the provisions of the remainder of sub-article 14 b.

As an aside, many banks (for whatever reason) in a similar situation, feel compelled to quote sub-article 29 b, but this is of course, an incorrect application of this sub-article.

Kind regards
Abrar
——–

FROM SH.

Dear Nguyen,

Many thanks for these. They are truely helpful!
I've replied to the issuing bank (as suggested in R480).
And to tell you the truth, we received their payment today, however with some deduction of the discrepancy fee. (no surprise to hear this right?)

Dear Abrar,

Thank you for your comment. I fully agree with you that sub-article 29b is irrelevant to this case.

Best regards
SH.