LASH Transport Document

[hueyjee]

Dear all,

Seek your expertise on the following.

LC called for Ocean Bill of Lading with additional condition "LASH Transport documents are not acceptable"
BL showing the following:
Vessel : PAC KALIMANTAN
Port of Loading: Pasir Gudang
Port of Discharge : Nhava Sheva, India

On board notation showing On board 'PAC KALIMANTAN' at Pasir Gudang, Malaysia on xx/xx/2011 connecting mother vessel 'CAPE RACE' at Singapore.

Refusal Notice received stated : BL showing pre-carriage by PAC KALIMANTAN as a barge is not acceptable.
Upon checking in google, notice PAC KALIMANTAN is a flat top deck cargo barge.

QUESTION:
Is this discrepancies valid? As per UCP, documents checker only need to determine from the face of documents whether the documents complied, do we need to go to the extent to verify the type of the vessel via google?

Appreciate your advise.

Thanks
HJ

[Ashish Sethiya]

This discrepancy is invalid
(Reason) 1. : Article 20 c ii: A bill of lading indicating that transshipment will or may take place is acceptable even if the credit prohibits transshipment if the goods have been shipped in a container , trailer or Lash barge as evidenced by the bill of lading.

(Reason) 2.: Article 5 -Documents v. goods, services or performance : Bank deal with documents and not with goods, services and performance to which the documents may relate.


other comments are appreciated

[w13918137376]

is "lash" an abbreviation? What does that mean?

[picant]

Hi Pals,

LASH is Lighter Aboard SHip.
So the discrepancy is invalid, but, even if, ICC decided not to revise the UCP, many changes occurred in Bank's behaviour due to the so called compliance.Checking ports, vessels, forwarders, carriers etc is an onus for banks and if something is discovered, may a bank closes one eye!?
However UCP 600 art 20 c ii is quite clear.
Ciao