Insurance Certificate

JudithAutié · Post by **JudithAutié** » Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:00 am

Hi
Here's one that I have had several opinions from my various colleagues. What do you think :

L/C states : shipment from any European port.
B/L indicates Anvers as port of shipment, Alexandria as discharge port
Insurance certificate states "shipment from any European port to Alexandria"

Article 28 f iii states :
iii. The insurance document must indicate that risks are covered at least between the place of taking in charge or shipment and the place of discharge or final destination as stated in the credit.

Can we consider that "any European Port" indicates "the place of taking in charge or shipment" ?

Thanks for your comments
Judith

GlennRansier_olsABN · Post by **GlennRansier_olsABN** » Fri Feb 03, 2012 12:00 am

Where does the coverage begin? From a UCP point of view it would appear acceptable provided that there was nothing else in the Ons. document that showed the coverage beginning after the port of loading.

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Sat Feb 04, 2012 12:00 am

I agree with Glenn.

JudithAutié · Post by **JudithAutié** » Sun Feb 05, 2012 12:00 am

I also think that there should be no problem. However, the argument that has been given is the last words "as stated in the credit" pertaining to both the place of dispatch and destination.

In case of a claim against the insurance, I doubt they could contest since the certificate covers dispatch from any European port, and shipment was made from an European port.

Frankly, I think that the refusal (the only descrepancy raised) is due to the fact that the confirming bank wants to get out of it's undertaking due to increased risk.

This is the kind of action that gives LCs such a bad name.

Thanks for your opinions
Judith

DanielD · Post by **DanielD** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:00 am

The answer is in 470/TA.699 rev.
analysis of discrepancy 3. "If the insurance certificate had indicated that the goods ..."
Regards

Daniel

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:00 am

Daniel,

699 does seem to me to cover a different scenario; one where the insurance document gives a specific place (Kolin) from where insurance is effective, unlike the one mentioned by Judith, but the transport document shows shipment from a different specific place (Podebrady).

Regards, Jeremy

JudithAutié · Post by **JudithAutié** » Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:00 am

Yes, the scenario is different there, but the answer does seem to accept an insurance certificate indicating a general area/zone of shipment, so maybe that opinion can be used to refute the (in my opinion) abusive discrepancy.

Thanks all.
Judith

NigelHolt · Post by **NigelHolt** » Tue Feb 07, 2012 12:00 am

Yes I see what you mean Judith. Apologies Daniel for not reading it in full.

DanielD · Post by **DanielD** » Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:00 am

Jeremy,

A qui il a été beaucoup demandé, il sera beaucoup pardonné.
Meilleures salutations
Daniel