Uncategorized WHEN LC REQUIRES PRESENTATION OF LESS THAN A FULL SET OF ORIGINAL BILLS OF LADING By Mr Old Man Posted on July 9, 2013 2 min read 4 0 6,980 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on Reddit Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr QUESTION Dear Mr. Old Man, L/C required:– 2/3 original bills of lading– Beneficiary’s certificate certifying that 1/3 original bill of lading has been sent directly to the applicant within 3 working days after shipment date. Documents presented included 3/3 original bills of lading and the beneficiary’s certificate with the required certification. The issuing bank raised the discrepancy “3/3 original bill of lading presented instead 2/3 as required by the L/C”. Was the discrepancy valid for refusal? Looking forward to your early answer. Thanks and best regards,J.——– ANSWER Dear J. In 2007 I ever answered the same question in www.letterofcreditforum.com that there was no discrepancy while other experts said it was a discrepancy. My reasoning at that time was that 1/3 original bill of lading should be disregarded as it was an additional document. Now I have to change my view because of ISBP 745 paragraph A29 (c), which says “When a credit requires presentation of less than a full set of original transport documents (for example, “2/3 original bills of lading), BUT DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY DISPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE REMAINING ORIGINAL BILL OF LADING (emphasized by Mr. Old Man), a presentation may include 3/3 original bills of lading”. It is understood from the beneficiary’s certificate that the beneficiary had to send 1/3 original bill of lading directly to the applicant within 3 working days after shipment date. Therefore, a presentation of 3/3 original bills of lading did not comply with the L/C requirement. The discrepancy raised by the issuing bank was valid. Best regards,Mr. Old Man
IS THE NOMINATED BANK REQUIRED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE BENEFICIARY HAS AUTHORIZED THE PRESENTING BANK TO PRESENT THE DOCUMENTS?
CAN THE ISUING BANK CITE “LATE PRESENTATION” AS A DISCREPANCY SOLELY BASED ON THE DATE OF THE COVER LETTER?
IS THE NOMINATED BANK REQUIRED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE BENEFICIARY HAS AUTHORIZED THE PRESENTING BANK TO PRESENT THE DOCUMENTS?
CAN THE ISUING BANK CITE “LATE PRESENTATION” AS A DISCREPANCY SOLELY BASED ON THE DATE OF THE COVER LETTER?