Home › Forums › Letters of Credit › Letters of Credit

Goods description in general terms?

Mon, 12/01/2008 - 08:35 — mika

LC mentioning goods description as " stainless steel coil " whereas B/L only shown " stainless steel ". According to UCP600 and ISBP, both indicating " In all other documents except invoices, the goods may be described in general terms not inconsistent with the description of the goods in the credit". Therefore, is it rasionale to take it as discrepancy?

 

‹ Is that workable? House Bill of lading ›
Mon, 12/01/2008 - 13:54 — Peter M

Discrepant

I will start the controversy by saying that the B/L is inconsistent and therefore discrepant.  Stainless steel can be produced in many forms, plate/sheet/coil/floor plate/rod etc. and the "coil" part of the L/C goods description is critical in describing the type and nature of goods shipped.

Bankers are not steel experts - if there is a difference between the description of the goods on the invoice and the bill of lading it should be called as a discrepancy.

I am sure other experts will have differing views - this topic is very subjective and seems to differ in application between countries and regions.

Mon, 12/01/2008 - 16:20 — LC Sam

I agree with Peter

Peter,

I have to agree with you on this.  The word "coil" is as integral as stainless steel.  However we need to remember that we are to look at the document as a whole. If it is possible to tell that the goods are in coils by reference to other areas of the document, then of course it need not be part of the merchandise description.

Best regards,

LC Sam

Tue, 12/02/2008 - 08:16 — Peter M

I agree

Thanks for the clarification Sam, you are right.  If the description shows stainless steel and elsewhere in the document is shows 2300 Coils (for example) then there is no discrepancy.

Tue, 12/02/2008 - 01:38 — Anup Sinha

As per Art 14 e) of the UCP

As per Art 14 e) of the UCP 600 quote " In documents other than the commercial invoice, the description of the goods, services or performance, if stated, may be in general terms not conflicting with their description in the credit".
However, The word "stainless Steel Coil" and "Stainless Steel" differs a lot. It does not give correct picture of the goods. Therefore, I feel this would be treated as discrepancy.

Anup Sinha

Sat, 12/06/2008 - 13:55 — Frammi

I agree with Anup Sinha, Sam and Peter

"The "Coil" is important and the document should be considered as a discrepancy even if the wording of the UCP and ISBPs allows for linguistical and juridical (mis-) interpretations. 

   -Each long journey starts with a small step-

Best regards

Frammi