AWB Consigned To Collecting Bank

Simple is Beautiful; the only thing came in my mind when thought of documentary collection. And I think more and more people are thinking the same in these days. Documentary Collection offers us far greater security than selling on open account; but not as much as a documentary credit. We should therefore be more cautious before starting selling using this method of payment. Documentary Collection Forum is an effort to help you on this way – admin; besttradesolution.com
Post Reply
marcostt
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:40 am
First Name: Marcos
Last Name: Tejeda
Organization: personal
Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
Location: USA

AWB Consigned To Collecting Bank

Post by marcostt » Thu Mar 14, 2013 7:31 am

Has someone had a case like this?
Imports Collection Covering Diamonds
Diamonds financed by the Remitting banks
AWB consigned to the Collecting bank
Key Point 1: Diamonds released to importers (by the shipping companies) without the authorization of the Collecting bank.
Key Point 2: There is no agreement between the Collecting bank and the importers/remitting banks, in regards to the goods consigned to the collecting banks.
Question 1: Should the Collecting Bank be concerned about their liability over the goods released to the importers without their authorization? Taking into consideration that the Collecting bank did not provide their prior agreement, as suggested by URC 522.
Question 2: Should the Remitting banks provide their specific authorization "deliver goods"? They are using the standard instructions: "deliver documents against acceptance". Given the apparent conflicting articles 4ai and 10ei of the URC 522. 4ai indicates that collecting banks "are only permitted to act upon the instructions given .." and 10e1 indicates that when the collecting banks release the goods then "the remitting bank shall be deemed to have authorized the collecting bank to do so". Notice that there is a difference between a remitting bank actually authorizing the release of the goods and a remitting bank being deemed to have authorized such release.
Question 3: If the event that the remitting banks cannot recover their money, can they sue the collecting banks on the grounds that they (the remitting banks) never provided their authorization to release the diamonds to the importers? Although the instruction "deliver documents" might be interpreted as "deliver goods" it is still an interpretation and and a lack of specificity. Can this lack of specificity and grey ground be an opening to a possible lawsuit? In special since there is no agreement that protects the collecting bank who is the consignee of the diamonds and the remitting banks financed the diamonds?
Please provide your comments. If the collecting banks should be concerned, what protecting measures should they take?
Thanks

User avatar
picant
Posts: 2026
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:49 pm

My thoughts

Post by picant » Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:32 am

Hi Pal,
just to start
n. 1 shipping company is liable, we have to check the way they release the goods.
n. 2 OK, but this happens every day
Collecting bank acted correctly , it is the shipping company that made a mistake in delivering the goods to a different consignee. A collecting bank is authorized , after having delivered the documents against payment or acceptance to issue a bank release to permit the drawee to take up the goods under a general authorization contained in URC 522, without liability.
Other comments appreciated
Ciao

mskhan42
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:11 pm
First Name: MUHAMMAD SAQIB
Last Name: KHAN
Organization: BANQUE DE COMMERCE
Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
Location: DUBAI

MISTAKE/FRAUD.

Post by mskhan42 » Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:56 pm

Dear friend,
100% Agreed with picant + also investigate with carrier/agent may be possession taken by importer by misrepresentation (fraud) at carrier/agent.
Regards,
M. Saqib khan

Post Reply