Late presentation of document

[Fajar]

Dear experts

I would like to know your opinion regarding this matter

Ucp allows nominating bank to have five working daya to examine the document which is not affected by latest date of presentation or export date.

My question is, of LC available by nominating bank country, and the nominating bank's schedule of remittance showing the date after latest date of presentation and expiry date but within 5 working days and quote statement on their sr, "document presented within LC time limit" (without specifying the actuall presentation date by the beneficiary to nominating bank.

Is this statement sufficient or the discrepancy late presentation and expired still applicable?

[cristiand969]

This statement is OK ! Unless clearly specified in L/C, the presentation date need not be stated as there is no provision in UCP 600 to this effect.

[picant]

Hi Pals,

the statement is only necessary in case of article 29 b. UCP 600.
other comments appreciated
Ciao

[Fajar]

Ini my case, the latest presentation date is not holiday, so the issuing bank raise discrepancy, please tell me of the issuing bank discrepancy statement is still valid on this matter

[picant]

Hi Pals,

if l/c is not claused concerning the presentation and there is only a problem of date in schedule or cover letter the issuing bank must accept documents. Then, one note, the five days rule is towords the presenter and not to the issuing bank, it is working forward not back(sorry no native speaker).
One more question are you the issuing or the presenting bank?
Other comments appreciated
ciao

[Fajar]

In this case, i am the issuing bank.

Me and my workmate think that its very strange for nominating bank to actually take 5 working days to examine the document. yesterday, the nominating bank said that the document arrived at their counter on Wednesday (latest presentation date).

If the latest presentation date is holiday, i can accept it, but the latest presentation date is not even holiday. They said that they sent the document on the next Wednesday. It raise the suspicion in my bank that the document is not actually sent by beneficiary to nominating bank at latest presentation date, but after it.

We think that the statement "document was sent on any LC timelimit" however, only applied if the latest presentation date is holiday, so that the debate point is on schedule of remittance date that raise suspicion on us that the beneficiary actually really late to present their document.

[picant]

Hi Pal,

examination of documents in export l/c may last 3 o 4 days, specially to substitute wrong invoices, packing lists etc.
I think you cannot prove that the presentation had been made later than expiry date, than has applicant suffered a damage ? or just to stop payment.
ciao

[Fajar]

Thank you for your opinion Picant, imho, ucp article 2 state that complying presentation means a presentation that in accordance with the terms and condition of credit. So if beneficiary's first presentation is not comply and they sent the document on the next day, the presentation date should be on next day.

[kisazi]

As my point of view, we check docs based on documents' content alone, we accept words which comply with LC, unless we can prove that docs are fraud.
So, when issuing bank nominate a bank to negotiate/pay/etc., issuing bank should accept nominated bank's statement as it is.

[cristiand969]

In this case, i am the issuing bank.

Me and my workmate think that its very strange for nominating bank to actually take 5 working days to examine the document. yesterday, the nominating bank said that the document arrived at their counter on Wednesday (latest presentation date).

If the latest presentation date is holiday, i can accept it, but the latest presentation date is not even holiday. They said that they sent the document on the next Wednesday. It raise the suspicion in my bank that the document is not actually sent by beneficiary to nominating bank at latest presentation date, but after it.

We think that the statement "document was sent on any LC timelimit" however, only applied if the latest presentation date is holiday, so that the debate point is on schedule of remittance date that raise suspicion on us that the beneficiary actually really late to present their document.

I am sorry to say that having such suspicions or making such assumptions create a dangerous situation for the letters of credit and makes room for unexpected results. As long as the UCP 600 allows maximum 5 banking days for a nominated bank, one should have never wonder whether or not checking and remittance was made in the last permitted day. The new approach of the UCP600 of stating MAXIMUM 5 banking versus 'the reasonable time not exceeding 7 banking days' (in previous UCP) comes just to avoid disputes of this sort . If you do not trust the nominated bank maybe you should cut RMA with them and/or make the credit available with you. The nomination of a bank to act (i.e effect payment) on behalf of issuing bank is a mandate which comes from the trust in the nominated bank to represent issuing bank in making payment.