Hi everybody,
I'd like to discuss the negotiability of insurance certificates.
In theory, we know that insurance certificate not a negotiable document, but in practice, the l/c's often request
insurance certificate issued TO ORDER XXX and/or ENDORSED TO ORDER OF XXX and banks accept this.
As we know certificate is a document based on open cover/policy. We receive certificates with no details of terms and conditions.The document presented is generally printout copy with faxcimile signature, assured as beneficiary and endorsed by them. .
By requesting and accepting such a document, do the issuing banks and/or applicants run the risk of being not compensated for any possible damage during transport by the insurance company claiming that we are not the true beneficiary of the insurance and/or beneficiary already claimed and received from insurance company?
Insurance Certificate v.s. Risk of Endorsment
-
Navi
- Posts: 362
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 4:17 pm
- First Name: Olcay
- Last Name: Özcan
- Organization: Bank
- Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
- Location: Turkey
-
picant
- Posts: 2026
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:49 pm
Very difficult to say......
Hi Pal,
we have a meeting with am insurance broker, view completely different from UCP or ISBP:
If you remember at the time of ISBP 645 the paragraphs concerning insurance were modified after the publication of these ISBP.
I think we have three entities playing a role:
+Insurance contractors,
+insured or assured
+beneficiary,
the problem is, certainly, that the importer or the bank must have the possibility to be refunded when goods were deteriorated. This happens, IMHO, not because you are legitimated by a signature but by the documentation that you have to present in case of claim.
However, being a bank clerk not aware of insurance industry it is better to follow the UCP or ISBP and have an insurance document issued to its order or name , endorsed if showing another entity.
Probably local laws will rule this situation.
Other comments appreciated
Ciao
we have a meeting with am insurance broker, view completely different from UCP or ISBP:
If you remember at the time of ISBP 645 the paragraphs concerning insurance were modified after the publication of these ISBP.
I think we have three entities playing a role:
+Insurance contractors,
+insured or assured
+beneficiary,
the problem is, certainly, that the importer or the bank must have the possibility to be refunded when goods were deteriorated. This happens, IMHO, not because you are legitimated by a signature but by the documentation that you have to present in case of claim.
However, being a bank clerk not aware of insurance industry it is better to follow the UCP or ISBP and have an insurance document issued to its order or name , endorsed if showing another entity.
Probably local laws will rule this situation.
Other comments appreciated
Ciao