|
Dear Sir,
Pls provide
some light on the following confusion:
Issuing Bank :
Bank A
Nominated Bank : Bank B
Available with: Bank B
Available by: Negotiation
DC No. 1234
One of the
terms: DC no. must be mentioned in all documents.
Another terms:
all documents must be dated.
Beneficiary
presented the document at the counter of nominated bank and nominated bank
observed the following discrepancies:
1.
Certificate of origin did not mention the DC No.
2.
Beneficiary’s certificate did not contain
signature.
As per consent
of the Beneficiary, the nominated Bank forwarded the documents to the
issuing Bank counter followed by mentioning the above two discrepancies in
the forwarding schedule with an instruction to hold the documents
pending further instruction from the presenter. [Emphasis added]
While examine
the documents, the issuing Bank observed another discrepancies in
addition to above two. i.e. Shipment advised is not dated. [emphasis added]
Situation: 1
the issuing
Bank provided notice of refusal as per sub article 16 (c) accordingly within
stipulated time frame by mentioning all the three discrepancies. But
the issuing mentioned the document status as follows:
the issuing bank holding
the documents until it receives a waiver from the applicant and agrees to
accept it, or receives further instructions from the presenter prior to
agreeing to accept a waiver.
Situation :2
The issuing Bank
mentioned only one discrepancy i.e. Shipment advised is not dated in its
refusal notice as per article 16(c) by choosing the documents status option
as follows:
the issuing bank holding
the documents until it receives a waiver from the applicant and agrees to
accept it, or receives further instructions from the presenter prior to
agreeing to accept a waiver.
Question:
Can the issuing
Bank change the previous instruction provided by the nominated Bank on the
ground that the issuing Bank is not observed exactly the same discrepancies
as the same observed by the nominated bank in situation situation 1 and 2?
|
