Determining Maturity Date when Docs are presented

The forum is dedicated to all who deals with LCs. Please share your experiences, problems and opinions with us. You are requested to be confined to LC related issues only. Let us together discover the beauty of Letter of Credit. Thank and regards – admin; besttradesolution.com
Post Reply
vinodkoli
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:05 pm
First Name: Vinod
Last Name: Koli
Organization: JPMorgan
Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
Location: Mumbai, India

Determining Maturity Date when Docs are presented

Post by vinodkoli » Tue May 26, 2009 11:43 pm

Dear All,

I have a Question on the said topic.
In an example, the Tenor mentioned in The LC is as follows : "180 Days after Docs Presentation"
Now here, how shall we determine the Bill Maturity date ?
In this scenario, there is no Draft required / presented and we need to give the Acceptance to the beneficiary. So how do we calculate the maturity date ?
In short what shall we consider the Tenor Start date ?
Is it the Docs presentation date at Nego Bank's counter ? OR
Is it the Doc Dispatch date ? OR
Is it the doc receipt date at the Issuing Bank's counter ?
There is no such clarification under UCP nor under ISBP.
Please can you assist ?

Armagedo
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:36 pm

IMHO

Post by Armagedo » Wed May 27, 2009 2:30 pm

Hi!

IMHO

If there is nothing helpfull in field 78 of MT700 to clarify then here is my thoughts:
1/ As per provisions of UCP 600 Article 6 in order presentation to take place (to be correct) it to be made either to nominated bank or issuing bank within appropriate presentation period.
2/ I think that it's clear that deferred payment condition to be read as "180 days after STRICT COMPLYING docs presentation" otherwise, if docs are found discrepant, no payment is possible under LC in usual way.

From above I would suggest that 180 days to be calculated from either
a/ the day next to the day on which presenation is found compliant by the nominated bank
or
b/ the day next to the day on which presenation is found compliant by the issuing bank

depending on availability of the credit and place where the docs were actually presented.

Good luck

cristiand969
Posts: 754
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:52 pm
First Name: Cristian
Last Name: D.
Organization: Bank
Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
Location: RO

You must calculate the maturity

Post by cristiand969 » Wed May 27, 2009 6:17 pm

From your enquiry I suspect that credit is available with you (a nominated bank) . Therefore the place of presentation is at your bank. Therefore the wording "from presentation' means presentation at your counters and you must calculate the maturity.
Armagedo: i think your suggestion from above is not quite correct:
Armagedo wrote:From above I would suggest that 180 days to be calculated from either
a/ the day next to the day on which presenation is found compliant by the nominated bank
or
b/ the day next to the day on which presenation is found compliant by the issuing bank

depending on availability of the credit and place where the docs were actually presented
.
In case the documents are found compliant the maturity starts AFTER THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF DOCUMENTS, in accordance with art46 A and 47 (paragraph2) of ISBP

User avatar
shahriar
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 1:03 am
First Name: Shahriar
Last Name: Masum
Organization: Mutual Trust Bank
Filter: Two Plus Two =: 4
Location: Bangladesh

from the date of complying presentation

Post by shahriar » Wed May 27, 2009 9:49 pm

in my opinion, the clock start ticking from the date of presentation only if the presentation is complying.

presentation made to nominated bank and both nominated bank and issuing bank found complying - maturity will be from the date of presentation at the counter of the nominated bank.
presentation made at the counter of nominated bank and issuing bank found it discrepant, maturity will be from the date of acceptance.

my argument is based on the fact that a UCP rules applies only to a complying presentation.

Armagedo
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:36 pm

sad, but true

Post by Armagedo » Thu May 28, 2009 6:56 pm

cristiand969
Armagedo: i think your suggestion from above is not quite correct:
Yeah, you're right.
I've fully missed this explanation.

Good luck

Post Reply