QUESTIONS REGARDING DATES

QUERY

Anonymous # 8. September 2010, 02:14

Nhu writes:

Dear Mr Old Man,

Pls give me your advice with the following case:

If L/C requires: all documents must indicate the l/c number and date;

1. Draft, courier receipt, fax report do not indicate, is this discrepancy?
2. If cert of analysis has issuing date earlier than the l/c date, and it indicate the l/c date; is it discrepancy?
3. Ben cert. certifying that shipping datail has been faxed to applicant…..fax report is required. if ben cert. has issuing date earlier than the fax report, is it discrepancy?

Thanks for your excellent advices.
—————————————

COMMENT

Mr. Old Man # 8. September 2010, 16:22

Hi,

1) Draft is not a document required under F. 46A, hence, the fact that draft that does not indicate LC no and date does not constitute a discrepancy unless there is a requirement that LC no and date must be indicated in the draft.
(Please note that there are different views as to whether draft is one of the documents required under LC).

If courier receipt is required to be presented for negotiation, it should indicate LC no and date to comply with LC requirement.
A fax activity report which is printed from a fax machine by nature does not contain LC no and date unless it is manually insetred by the beneficiary. If Mr. Old Man were the document checker he would not raise this discrepancy.

To avoid dispute, please expressly states in the LC that all documents, except draft, courier receipt and fax report, must indicate LC no and date.

2) Notwithstanding UCP 600 Article 14 (i), which says “ A document may be dated prior to the issuance date of the credit…”, those who follow "strict compliance" doctrine would reject the certificate of analysis as it is unlogical. The certificate cannot indicate the number and date of the LC which has not been issued.

Just a joke! How can the local civil registrar agrees to issue a birh certificate indicating the birth date of a baby not yet born?

Mr. Old Man is not a disciple of "strict compliance" doctine.

3) It could be a false certification, but I would accept it according to UCP 600 Article 14 (i).

Please note that the above is of Mr. Old Man's own view.

Regards,
Mr. Old Man