Best Trade Solution

Hi..

We have had effected 3 shipments under an LC and it was a long terms contract. The LC calls for one BL along with other shipping documents to be directly couriered to the applicant (This was agreed between beneficiary and applicant) due to short transit time. The other two BLs along with rest of the documents were to be presented for Negotiation. It was a confirmed 180 days usance LC.

first set of documents were discrepancy free

The issue now is as follows

There were three other shipments for the discrepancies were like this.

2nd Shipment : - BILL OF LADING SIGNATURE CAPACITY NOT IDENTIFIED - Can this be considered as discrepancy
3rd & 4th Shipments :- LC EXPIRED/LATE PRESENTATION/BL NOT SIGNED AS PER UCP, AGENT NOT IDENTIFIED.

The applicant have already taken the delivery of the consignments and now refusing to accept the discrepancy , is there any chance to get the payment , provided assuming the issuing bank have endorsed the BL (the one BL the applicant directly received)without which the shipping line cannot the release the consignment. So is there any obligation of LC issuing bank to release the payment even if the applicant refuse to accept the discrepancies

Could any one help on these issues...

Thanks
Sumesh

Ussually, issuing bank held the applicant's collateral if they endorsed th Bill of Lading, until the document presented.

So you have high possibility to receive payment.

You can sue the issuing bank if its proven that they have endorsed the back side of BL or authorize shipping company to release goods with shipping guarantee, but refuse to pay

I understand that the credit required B/L consigned to the order of issuing bank, otherwise I don't see the logical reasoning of issuinng bank involvement in B/L by endorsing the document in favour of other party (applicant)
Having said that, you may want to note that when a party transfers a title of property by way of B/L endorsement, the first legal condition for a valid transfer is that the respective party is a 'lawfull holder' namely a holder in good faith of the title of property. Under the most legal systems it is a provision that nobody can transfer more rights that it has or has acquired.
When endorsing a B/L at the request of the applicant, the issuing bank has irrevocably taken the obligation to accept the documents under the credit as presented and pay them in order to retain his position as holder in good faith, otherwise the bank will face the consequences of harm produced to the interested parties and can be sued for a deliberate transfer of a title for which it hasn't any right to do so.
When such B/L is endorsed without the shipper's authority (because shipper delivered the title against payment and not free of payment) a subsequent bona fide transferee cannot acquire the rights to the goods represented by that B/L and refusal of payment can be seen as an act of stealing the goods.
Hope it helps!
.
LATER EDIT: as long as the issuing bank endorsed the 1st original of B/L presented by applicant , it doesn't have too much importance of the discrepancies in the set presented (except for discrepancy commission) but one cannot express an opinion without actually seeing the document in question.

Thank you....