*originally posted by Naeem Jan It depende on the wording of stamp and its position. It the stamp clearly states "received" and the name of receiver, it should be acceptable to the negotiating bank. However, the second consideration is presence of shipped on board stamp. If the stamp is no...

*originally posted by ?

The bank was wrong. UCP dictates that. In addition, air waybill is a non-negotiable document. There is no logic for asking the full set.

*Originally posted by ?

Usually, all bills of lading have a column entitled "Date and Place of Issue". Date stamp on any other part of the document should, as far as I concerned, not be considered as date of issue.

*originally posted by Naeem Jan Different regions have different practices. But one thing is common that that the discrepancies are not being handled by the banks in accordance with Article 14. Its a 4 step process: 1) decide on the basis of documents alone whether there are discrepancies; 2) approa...

*originally posted by Uta Pfeiffer I fully agree with Mr. O Brien. You can never ask for a full set of Airway Bill like you can ask for a full set of B/L. The presentation of the Original Aiwaybill for the consignor is acceptable. Uta Pfeiffer/RZB,Vienna,18.8.2000 [edited 11/2/00 3:59:38 PM: Added u...

*originally posted by Vincent O'Brien Q. 'Does the capacity of the carrier need to be indicated beside the signature on the Bill of Lading? From the bank document checkers perspective examining a Bill of Lading the answer is as follows: If the BL is signed or authenticated by the carrier or master t...

*originally posted by T. O. Lee 1 Firstly, a Forwarder's Certificate of Receipt or Transport (FCR or FCT) is not deeemed as a transport document within the meaning of the UCP 500, as expressed by the ICC Group of Experts in its answer to queries and Charles del Busto in ICC Publication No. 511 page ...

*originally posted by T.O.Lee I receive no more enquiries on "original" documents over the internet or other media after ICC's pubnlishing its "Decision on Originals". For one pending case on "orignal" documents, occurred before ICC's announcement, the issuing bank has ...

*Originally posted by?

I think the bank has no right to make such interpretation

*originally posted by premchai w

In my view, I think no discrepancies on case B/L issued and signed by ABC as Agent which may be deemed to Frowarding B/L and UCP.500 are acceptable and no ground to allege discrepancy.