Chào các bạn.
Hôm nay chúng ta tiếp tục eURC Version 1.0 với Điều e11 quy định về trường hợp chứng từ điện tử bị lỗi dữ liệu (data corruption of an electronic record). Theo đó:
a. Nếu chứng từ điện tử nhận bởi ngân hàng bị lỗi dữ liệu, thì ngân hàng chuyển chứng từ có thể thông báo cho người xuất trình, hoặc ngân hàng thu hộ hoặc xuất trình có thể thông báo cho ngân hàng chuyển chứng từ, và có thể yêu cầu ngân hàng chuyển chứng từ xuất trình lại chứng từ điện tử.
b. Nếu ngân hàng thu hộ hoặc xuất trình yêu cầu như vậy và người xuất trình hoặc ngân hàng chuyển chứng từ không xuất trình lại chứng từ điện tử trong vong 30 ngày, thì ngân hàng thu hộ hoặc xuất trình có thể xem chứng từ điện tử như chưa được xuất trình và có thể tùy nghi định đoạt các chứng từ điện tử theo cách thức mà được xem là thích hợp mà không chịu bất kỳ trách nhiệm nào.
Các bạn đọc thêm phần COMMENTARY bằng tiếng Anh để hiểu thêm gốc rễ của quy định này.
Thân ái.
Mr. Old Man
—-
ARTICLE e11
DATA CORRUPTION OF AN ELECTRONIC RECORD
a. If an electronic record that has been received by a bank appears to have been corrupted, the remitting bank may inform the presenter, or the collecting or presenting bank may inform the remitting bank, and may request it to re-present the electronic record.
b. If a collecting or presenting bank makes such a request and the presenter or remitting bank does not re-present the electronic record within 30 calendar days, the collecting or presenting bank may treat the electronic record as not presented and may dispose of the electronic records in any manner deemed appropriate without any responsibility.
COMMENTARY
eURC article e11 provides an optional method by which a bank may recover data that has been corrupted after having been received. Electronic records will be initially presented by the presenter (principal or a party on behalf of the principal) to the remitting bank, and then by the remitting bank to the collecting or presenting bank. The rule reflects who should approach (inform) whom in this sequence of events. The chain of communication is that the collecting/ presenting bank will communicate with the remitting bank. The remitting bank may be able to resolve the issue with or without the intervention of the principal.
There is no rule in URC 522 for paper documents that are lost or rendered unreadable by a bank after they have been received. Because most banks have procedures in place that minimise the consequences of such loss, there is no perceived need for such a rule. These procedures can involve requesting a substitute document, or indemnifying the applicant for any harm that may result from a lost or missing document.
Whilst this works in the paper world owing to an understanding of the risks, there is not yet a similar comprehension in the electronic world. Accordingly, article e11 offers a method by which corrupted data may be re-presented.
A similarity can be recognised with the paper world, in that it is not unusual to approach a presenter for substitute paper documents. The process outlined by article e11 should prove beneficial to all parties, bearing in mind that it supports an efficient data substitution method.
The advantage of article e11 is that it operates without regard to fault or negligence and avoids entirely the difficult questions of liability and proof inherent in such concepts.
As stated above, the provisions of this article are a matter of recommendation and optional only. This approach need not necessarily be utilised by a bank, and a bank remains free to take any other measures they may consider to be necessary in order to mitigate any perceived losses due to the corruption of data while the record is within its control. Article e11 is based on the assumption that all electronic records are replaceable.
AFTER PRESENTATION
It must be clearly noted that this article only applies to the data corruption of an electronic record subsequent to presentation. Should a problem exist with an electronic record before presentation, this can only be the responsibility of the presenter to fix.
CORRUPTION
Neither the eURC nor article e11 define ‘corruption’. The term is intended to encompass any distortion or loss of data that renders the electronic record as it was presented unreadable in whole or part due to the data having become scrambled in an unrecoverable manner.
MODIFICATION, EXCLUSION, AND ALTERNATIVES
A bank that does not wish to take the approach to corruption of data provided in eURC article e11 may modify the eURC collection instruction to expressly state an alternative in the eURC collection instruction. On the other hand, it may elect to exclude it. However, this is not recommended and should not be regarded as an optimal approach.
ELECTRONIC RECORDS
Although the eURC permits mixed presentations of paper documents and electronic records, eUCP article e11 relates only to electronic records and not the loss or destruction of paper documents.
RE-PRESENT
eURC article e11 uses the term ‘re-present’. As stated in eURC sub-article 3 (b) (ix), the term means: ‘to substitute or replace an electronic record already presented.’
REQUEST FOR REPLACEMENT
eURC sub-article e11 (a) indicates that the request for replacement should be directed by a remitting bank to the presenter of an electronic record, or by a collecting or presenting bank to the remitting bank. It implies that the request must have been received by the presenter or collecting or presenting bank in order for the suspension to operate.
While eURC article e11 does not indicate the format of the request, it should identify the eURC collection instruction, identify the electronic record, contain a request that it be replaced, and indicate that the request is being made under eURC article e11.
Furthermore, although eURC article e11 does not expressly state when or how the request for replacement should be made, good banking practice in light of URC 522 sub-article 12 (a) (Disclaimer on Documents Received) would suggest that the request be made in the same manner, namely by telecommunication if available, and, if not, by other expeditious means and without delay once the corruption is discovered.
FAILURE TO REPLACE
Although the corruption of the data occurred when the electronic record was in the control of the bank, a request for replacement under eURC article e11 has serious consequences if the record is not replaced. eURC sub-article e11 (b) provides that the failure to replace data within 30 calendar days after a request pursuant to eURC article e11 has been made is deemed to be a failure to present the electronic record. Because of the seriousness of this consequence, the time period is sufficiently reasonable to permit replacement, and all parties should be cautious about lessening this period, which may raise questions about its reasonableness.
