Search found 20 matches
- Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:23 pm
- Forum: Trade Finance
- Topic: Shippings marks
- Replies: 0
- Views: 4990
Shippings marks
Good day My colleagues and I can't seem to agree whether or not the document was discrepant so I would like your opinion on the matter: LC STATES UNDER REQUIRED DOCUMENTS: ''INSURANCE TO BE COVERED BY APPLICANT. BENEFICIARY SHALL ADVISE TO ABC COMPANY WITHIN 7 WORKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SHIPMENT ...
- Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:39 pm
- Forum: Trade Finance
- Topic: Name of beneficiary
- Replies: 0
- Views: 4854
Name of beneficiary
We would like your opinion on the following: -LC STATES AS BENEFICIARY: ABC COMPANY -LICENSE SHOWS AS EXPORTER ABC COMPANY -CONTRACT SHOWS AS BEN ABC COMPANY AND IS SIGNED BY ABC COMPANY -UNDER REQUIRED DOCS: copy of the original commercial invoice signed by beneficiary for a value not exceeding the...
- Thu Jul 27, 2017 1:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Certificate of Origin GSP Form A
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3798
Certificate of Origin GSP Form A
Mr. James My opinion is based on the information you provided. when reading your topic I immediately thought of article A17 of ISBP quote: "The fact that a document has a box, field or space for date to be inserted does not necessarily mean that such box, field or space is to be completed"...
- Thu May 25, 2017 1:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Bill of lading with clause No direct overside discharge or d
- Replies: 4
- Views: 4968
Bill of lading with clause No direct overside discharge or d
thank you everyone for your response
- Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Bill of lading with clause No direct overside discharge or d
- Replies: 4
- Views: 4968
Bill of lading with clause No direct overside discharge or d
Hello, I would like to have your opinion as to whether you would consider a bill of lading containing the following clause (on the front of the BL): 'No direct overside discharge or direct delivery' as discrepant or not. The LC did not indicate that such clause were not acceptable. The LC required t...
- Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Article 9 (f)
- Replies: 1
- Views: 2249
Article 9 (f)
We would be curious to know how your bank treats non authenticated swift message (MT999) (article 9 f) a) How are they handled? Are they refused and the sender is asked to use a bank with which both sender and receiver have an agreement for transmitting/receiving authenticated message? b) If banks a...
- Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Payment obligation
- Replies: 2
- Views: 2628
Payment obligation
I agree with your position. I would have the issuing bank amend the DC to read ''90 % of invoice value...'' instead of ''90 % of LC value...'' The term ''LC value'' as a different meaning than ''invoice value'' which would be more suited since partial shipment are allowed. I believe it is a case of ...
- Wed Sep 19, 2012 1:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Article 38 j.
- Replies: 8
- Views: 5867
Article 38 j.
Thank you all for your input.
Regards
Regards
- Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: MT745 under L/C confirm
- Replies: 2
- Views: 2054
MT745 under L/C confirm
Dear Phan If you refer to the S.W.I.F.T. Message reference Guide, category 7, a MT754 ''is used to advise the Receiver that documents were presented in accordance with the credit terms and are being forwarded as instructed.'' I would therefore consider this MT754 as meaning conform documents were pr...
- Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:00 am
- Forum: UCP 600
- Topic: Article 38 j.
- Replies: 8
- Views: 5867
Article 38 j.
After your last comment I see that my understanding was correct. So I go back to my first comment and ask how do you make it available with the second bene's bank
by modifying 41d
by modifying 41d