QUESTION
Dear Nguyen,
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, Oct 24, 20xx) while we send the docs the next date to the issuing bank (i.e. Oct 25, 20xx), but we forgot to certify the real date when the beneficiary made the presentation in our cover letter.
I feel very embarrassed, 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.
——-
ANSWER
Dear Sh.,
Covering schedule is not a document required under the LC and does not form part of the documents to be examined, 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.
According to ICC Opinion 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”
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.”
R481
“If the schedule from the negotiating bank stated that all terms and conditions had been complied with, this would be sufficient to meet the conditions of sub-Article 44(c). In the absence of such notification or certification on the schedule, the issuing bank would be entitled to raise the issue with the negotiating bank. However, upon receiving confirmation that the documents were presented within the prescribed time limits and that it was purely an omission on the part of the negotiating bank, the issuing bank must accept the documents if otherwise in order “.
These above -quoted opinions were given under UCP 500 but they apply equally to UCP600 with the sole difference being the relative UCP article
Best regards,
Nguyen Huu Duc
