Home › Forums › Letters of Credit › Letters of Credit

ADVISING OF CREDITS

Tue, 07/08/2008 - 23:45 — zapcoolsail

Hi to evryone,

Its regarding article 9 pertaining to advising of credits.My questions are

1)How to check the apparent authenticity of a letter of credit .

2)What does it mean as in article 9b "that the advise accurately reflects the terms and conditions of credit."?

3)Finally suppose advising bank recieves an LC for advising but forgets to advise it....is it liable....??till what time can it advise the LC?

I am new to this field so can anyone please clear my doubts?

‹ CONFIRMATION OF LC Which Country, please? ›
Sat, 07/12/2008 - 11:38 — cv_600

Answers

1) Simple, a tested telex/swift or authorised signatories sign (in mail LCs).

2) Basically advising bank should advise/forward whatever it has got from issuingbank without changing any clauses/detail etc.

3) I dont understand how can a bank forget to advise LC! Also if something of that sort happens it can advise LC whenever it remembers too, i dont think anywhere its mentioned that there is a time limit within which the advising bank has to advise the LC.

Thu, 07/10/2008 - 08:48 — Currer

advising of documentary credits

Dear Zapcoolsail,

yours is indeed a very broad question and the answer would depend on the circumstances.

Maybe some examples are helpful to illustrate the process.   

 

1)

SWIFT: checking the authenticator keyTelex: checking the test keyMail: checking the signatures     

2)

When receiving a MT700 the advising bank may choose to advise the credit through another bank sending a MT710. The advice is not identical to the credit received but does “accurately reflect” the terms and conditions of the credit.It may be business policy of an advising bank not to include reimbursement instructions or requests for post financing in their advice. The terms and conditions would nevertheless be reflected accurately.

3) 

This is an issue outside of the scope of the UCP. The advising bank has no obligation under the documentary credit.One would certainly expect a bank to exercise reasonable care. However, the UCP are unlikely to be basis for a claim for compensation of damages due to non-advice of a documentary credit.

Kind regards

Currer

Thu, 07/10/2008 - 09:53 — pan

Advising bank

Hi friend, definition of advising bank is at art 2 UCP, but per SWIFT guide the bank receiving an MT700, containing in field 57 another bank, is not the advising bank but the receiver. Then any bank makes its own interest to get commissions and, may be, new customers. Business is business.

Ciao 

 

 

Wed, 07/09/2008 - 22:12 — zapcoolsail

Can anyone clarify

Can anyone  Plz clarify the above doubts?