Amendment by MT799 (free format SWIFT)
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:00 am
Bogdan, Vin and all.
Thank you all for the clear conclusion which makes perfect sense to me.
It is not uncommon for banks to use messages other than recommended SWIFT message types and not only with LC’s. but also collections and in particular guarantees and standby LC.
Can I ask a basic and probably not so smart question?
What exactly does it mean when a bank issues a SWIFT Authenticated Message, even if it is not the exactly correct type which we all now agree is best to use.
Maybe the message was issued by a head office on behalf of a branch?
Is a bank bound or obligated by the contents of an authenticated SWIFT message or is it just the branch?
I did a search on google and found some interesting information on SWIFT standards and messages but did not get a clear answer to this question.
Again apologies if this question is too basic.
[edited 9/20/2007 12:22:42 PM]
Thank you all for the clear conclusion which makes perfect sense to me.
It is not uncommon for banks to use messages other than recommended SWIFT message types and not only with LC’s. but also collections and in particular guarantees and standby LC.
Can I ask a basic and probably not so smart question?
What exactly does it mean when a bank issues a SWIFT Authenticated Message, even if it is not the exactly correct type which we all now agree is best to use.
Maybe the message was issued by a head office on behalf of a branch?
Is a bank bound or obligated by the contents of an authenticated SWIFT message or is it just the branch?
I did a search on google and found some interesting information on SWIFT standards and messages but did not get a clear answer to this question.
Again apologies if this question is too basic.
[edited 9/20/2007 12:22:42 PM]