ISBP PARAGRAPH 159

________________________________________
QUERY
________________________________________

Hi Mr Old Man,

Could you pls clarify the para 159 ISBP latest version concerning Railway Bill as follows: International standard banking practice is to accept a railway bill evidencing date stamp by the railway company or railway station of departure without showing the name of the carrier…

. I wonder that if there is only date inside the stamp without name of railway company acceptable as per para 159?
. Pls share us experience about railway bill as the issuing bank does not control the goods (RWB mostly evidences the consignee as the importer)

Thanks
Ms NH
________________________________________
COMMENT
________________________________________

Hi NH,

If the railway bill has been identified to be signed by the carrier or an agent on behalf of the carrier, the date stamp that includes the date only (without showing the name of the carrier or a named agent signing for or on behalf of the carrier) is acceptable. This reflects a common practice in the railway industry.

It is true and correct that a railway bill is not a document of title which can be transferred by endorsement as an ocean bill of lading. Therefore, the railway bill should be consigned to a named consignee, i.e., the applicant/ importer, and not to order or to the order of any party.
If the bank wishes to control the goods, it can require a railway bill consigned to its name and then authorizes the applicant to take delivery of the goods by issuing a letter of authorization. But this bad practice is not encouraged. What’s more. The bank may encounter unexpected difficulties when the goods are consigned to its name. If you can not control the goods you must be able to control the applicant/importer. So, KYC measure is recommended.

Best regards,
Mr. Old Man