PLS COMMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING B/L:
+ L/C terms:
Field 44A (Place of receipt): New Zealand Port
Field 44B (Place of destination): Inchon port, Korea.
B/L can show any ports as Port of loading and port of discharge because P.O.Loading , P.O.Discharge not required in L/C
.
Is B/L acceptable?
.
We disagree with opinion of R226 which indicate Port of loading and Port of discharge must show the same with Field 44a, 44b in L/C.
Thanks
Port of loading, Port of Discharge
-
THI THUY MYT_
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:15 pm
-
THI THUY MYT_
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:15 pm
Port of loading, Port of Discharge
pls clarify that: "our B/L showed POL, P.O.D differs from Field 44a, 44b and issuing bank assume that this B/L have disc. "
-
GlennRansier_
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:19 pm
Port of loading, Port of Discharge
SWIFT field 44A: Place of Taking in Charge/Dispatch/From...Place of Receipt. If only 44"A." is used and SWIFT Field 44E: Port of loading/Airport of Departure is not used in the LC then generally speaking a multimodal is required and the place of receipt must match the LC not the port of loading.
-
THI THUY MYT_
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:15 pm
Port of loading, Port of Discharge
PLS ADD ADDITIONAL INFOMATION AS L/C REQUIRED OCEAN BILL OF LADING.
-
HOANGTHIANHTHU_invalid
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:15 pm
Port of loading, Port of Discharge
Dear MYT,
I agree with Glenn that a multimodal transport document is required if only Field 44A and Field 44B are used. Therefore, the document presented should be examined under article 19 and not article 20.
By the way, for your reference I wish to quote herewith ICC opinions expressed in their Document 470/1128 28 Sept, 2009 with regards to selecting the appropriate transport document:
Quote
This is a key issue and one that banks should pay particular attention to. By selecting the transport document that reflects the correct routing and appropriate means of conveyance, many of the issues seen today can be avoided.
The structure of UCP 600, in particular in changing the order of the transport documents, was to emphasise that in most shipments today there is an element of multimodal or combined transport and that, perhaps, applicants should be calling for more multimodal or combined transport documents than bills of lading.
Banks are invited to educate their customers in selecting the correct transport document for the carriage that is being undertaken and that where transport by more than one means of conveyance will occur, to request the presentation of a multimodal or combined transport document instead of a bill of lading.
This process can be aided significantly by the incorporation of SWIFT fields 44A, E, F and B intoLC application forms. The correct completion of these fields, by the applicant and/or the issuing bank, will identify the suitable form of transport document e.g.
Fields 44E and F only = Bill of Lading, Sea Waybill, Charter Party Bill of Lading or Air Waybill
Fields 44A and B only = Multimodal or Combined Transport Document, Road, Rail or Inland Waterway or Post / Courier
Any 3 fields from 44A, E, F or B (or all of them) = Multimodal or Combined Transport Document
The recommendation for incorporation of these fields into the LC application form also pre-supposes that the form allows for the applicant to select from a range of transport documents and not only from a bill of lading or air waybill.
Unquote
Best regards and Happy New Year,
N.H.Duc
I agree with Glenn that a multimodal transport document is required if only Field 44A and Field 44B are used. Therefore, the document presented should be examined under article 19 and not article 20.
By the way, for your reference I wish to quote herewith ICC opinions expressed in their Document 470/1128 28 Sept, 2009 with regards to selecting the appropriate transport document:
Quote
This is a key issue and one that banks should pay particular attention to. By selecting the transport document that reflects the correct routing and appropriate means of conveyance, many of the issues seen today can be avoided.
The structure of UCP 600, in particular in changing the order of the transport documents, was to emphasise that in most shipments today there is an element of multimodal or combined transport and that, perhaps, applicants should be calling for more multimodal or combined transport documents than bills of lading.
Banks are invited to educate their customers in selecting the correct transport document for the carriage that is being undertaken and that where transport by more than one means of conveyance will occur, to request the presentation of a multimodal or combined transport document instead of a bill of lading.
This process can be aided significantly by the incorporation of SWIFT fields 44A, E, F and B intoLC application forms. The correct completion of these fields, by the applicant and/or the issuing bank, will identify the suitable form of transport document e.g.
Fields 44E and F only = Bill of Lading, Sea Waybill, Charter Party Bill of Lading or Air Waybill
Fields 44A and B only = Multimodal or Combined Transport Document, Road, Rail or Inland Waterway or Post / Courier
Any 3 fields from 44A, E, F or B (or all of them) = Multimodal or Combined Transport Document
The recommendation for incorporation of these fields into the LC application form also pre-supposes that the form allows for the applicant to select from a range of transport documents and not only from a bill of lading or air waybill.
Unquote
Best regards and Happy New Year,
N.H.Duc
-
JudithAutié
- Posts: 195
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:20 pm
Port of loading, Port of Discharge
That is a really good clarification, but I would also like to say that the sellers should also be very clear in their offers.
Whenever I talk to beneficiaries I always emphasize that if their offers were clearer and they provided either a draft l/c that they want to receive or at least a list of the documents they could provide their lives (and the banker's) would be less complicated.
You'd be surprised the number of sales people I meet that 1° know nothing about incoterms and 2° even less about transport problems -- and leave all that to the "administrative people" to muddle through as best they can.
Happy New Year to all
Judith
Whenever I talk to beneficiaries I always emphasize that if their offers were clearer and they provided either a draft l/c that they want to receive or at least a list of the documents they could provide their lives (and the banker's) would be less complicated.
You'd be surprised the number of sales people I meet that 1° know nothing about incoterms and 2° even less about transport problems -- and leave all that to the "administrative people" to muddle through as best they can.
Happy New Year to all
Judith