Tweet

Strict compliance in letters of credit transactions

Written by: Dr. Mohamed Ibrahim

Article Overview: A short note on the business efficacy of the rule of strict compliance in letters of credit transactions

Strict compliance in letters of credit transactions

Letters of credits are of prime importance in the finance of international trade. They are aptly called the lifeblood of international trade. However, the question of strict compliance poses a practical problem. The main reason underlying the problem is the question of interpretation of the rules governing the process of letters of credits as contained in the Uniform Customs and Practice of documentary credits (UCP 1993 Revision) of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). It is submitted that the scope of discrepancy in letters of credits transaction is wide. It may comprise besides discrepancy in documents, errors and omissions, and late presentation of documents. Yet, in reliance on the recent surveys carried in the UK by SITPRO, the extent of loss is great. The UCP rules prescribe that the role of the banker is to examine the documents so as to make sure that the tendered documents do not contradict one another. This position is confirmed by the International Standard of Banking Practice (ISBP) for examination of documents under documentary credits. The ISBP is perceived to uphold uniformity of practice worldwide to the effect of saving time, speed up the flow of international trade, reduce cost and keep away from superfluous disputes.
The rule of strict compliance is in theory structured on the rule of independence of the letter of credit from the underlying Contract. The banker is obliged to make payment on tender of conforming documents. On the other hand, it is also obliged not to pay if presented with non conforming documents. To all intents and purposes, the rule, serves a double function. On the one hand, it obliges the beneficiary to tender regular conforming documents. On the other hand it obligates the bank to hold fast to its authorization in not comforting the beneficiary obligation.
The strict compliance standard supports the aims of assurance and dependability of the banker's credit; that against certainty of payment to the beneficiary, the account party is as well made certain to take delivery of documents in compliance to the tenor of the credit. The implied obligation of the banker is to pay against indisputable compliant documents. In the event this pragmatic aspect is not strictly considered, credits would slack their business efficiency. It is pertinent to indicate that if payment were dependent upon the interpretation of the underlying contract, the beneficiary would not be encouraged to employ the device.
It may be said that the rationalization behind the doctrine of substantial compliance does not warrant its application in letters of credit law. The essential reason for the substantial performance doctrine in Contract Law is to prevent the promisee from forfeiting the right of the promisor, when the latter carries out a substantial portion of his part of the deal. Nonetheless, the banker, under a letter of credit cannot obtain unjust enrichment for just rejecting to honour a draft as the banker usually charges a small fee. Moreover, the doctrine of substantial compliance is not tenable as a justification in a letter of credit transaction, where it specifically requires, as a condition precedent, submission of exacting documents.
It may seem axiomatic that the substantial standard runs opposite to the crucial objective of certainty secured by the strict standard, that the function of the banker is to find out whether the documents match on their face to the credit tenor or not. It is evident that application of the substantial standard imposes on the bankers the burden of performing an examination beyond the documentary field. This necessitates a time consuming effort and increases costs. The practical outcome is that the banker would require, besides well trained bankers in the custom and usage of the banking industry, lawyers to examine the complicated legal issues caught up in the procedure of deciding whether a definite performance is to be considered substantial or otherwise. In actual fact, documentary managers in most banks are not lawyers or having expertise in the arts of different trades. Likewise, a banker is bound to complete the process of examination within a reasonable time. On account of these matters the substantial standard is attacked on the basis that it invites controversy, disputes and it is anathema to the successful functioning of the letter of credit as a wonderful commercial device. In sum, the strict compliance rule is apt to maintain the letter of credit in international trade as a quick, efficient and inexpensive device.

Related Articles
  USE LETTERS OF CREDIT (L/Cs) TO GET FINANCING
  Credit Card Processing Accounts
  Business Credit Cards versus Personal Credit Cards
  Credit Card Advance Financing
  You Take Phones?

Article Tags: beneficiary, chamber of commerce, dependability, discrepancy, documentary credits, errors and omissions, finance of international trade, intents and purposes, international chamber of commerce, international chamber of commerce icc, isbp, letter of credit, lifeblood, prime importance, saving time, sitpro, strict compliance, time speed, uniform customs, uniformity



Related Forum Posts
Browsing Websites on iPhones - It's interesting to wonder whether your target market will browse your website using this technology but I'd certainly have to research how secure these wireless devices are before I start using them. I am concerned that personal details and credit card numbers could be intercepted when transmitting them through a wireless device, especially with the initial incarnations of this particular technology. How much time have these companies spent on security measures? Will we will soon start hearing horror stories of credit card numbers being stolen through wireless transactions?
Online Payment Methods - I'd like to know what Payment method do entrepreneurs use to process credit cards online? Here at RSC Business Group we have made a decision to go with Paypal in the short term. If we find that we have more than 10 transactions a month then we plan on going with a Bank Processor of Payments. What do you guys use?
Customer protection or sales loss? - While doing some recent online shopping, I've noticed that a few retailers (including ones on eBay) will ship only to addresses verified by credit card issuers, so you basically can't buy a gift for a friend and have it sent to his/her place. Is this a good way to protect customers from fraudulent transactions or are you really just limiting your sales potential?
Re: Interrealtionship between financial statements - Yes, it’s necessary to take a complete toll of account transactions. If you don’t, then how would you be able to track your financial figures? For example, If a person sold goods for USD 5,000.00, half in cash and half in credit, then with taken impact of all three i.e. cash flow by USD 2,500.00 balance sheet through both cash and receivable and income/P&L statement by USD 5,0000.00, the transaction will not be complete.
Re: Online Payment Methods - Hi Andy, We use 2Checkout for all our CC transactions (Roughly 200 a month). We tried PayPal first but we found that our particular customers, were not web educated enough to recognize all the Phishing scams that are out there for PayPal/Ebay. After about our 10 complaints, in just a few weeks, we made the switch to 2Checkout. 2Checkout has been really good to work with. Any issues have been resolved quickly and have been fairly minor. Their online CP is pretty good and allows for everything that we need as a business. The process of getting customers to set up an account to make a payment, is fairly easy as well. Ideally, the first choice for us was to get our own merchant account with our bank and then process our own CC transactions, but the banks have some pretty tight requirements for this and as a new business, we did not qualify. We went to PayPal and then 2Checkout as other solutions. Ideally, with some good history with 2Checkout, I'll take a detailed report back to the banks to see if we are a little more desireable. FYI... Fees: 2Checkout - 5% Holdback for 90 days and 5.5% fee + a $.45 per transaction charge (Their exchange rates from USD to Canadian are very much weighted to their benifit) Bank Merchant account - 2.5% to 5% fee, with no holdback and flat monthly fees to cover transactions (But some transactions fees may be applied as well).


Share this article with your friends. Fund someone's dream.

Leave a comment below or share on the left and you'll help support entrepreneurs in Africa through our partnership with Kiva. Over $50,000 raised and counting - Please keep sharing! Learn more.

Tweet

Newsletter

Get advice & tips from famous business
owners, new articles by entrepreneur
experts, my latest website updates, &
special sneak peaks at what's to come!

Name:
Email:

Popular Articles

Top Ten Home-Based Businesses

Starting A Set of Books

Selling What Sizzles vs. Delivering Real Value

Suggestions

Email us your ideas on how to make our
website more valuable! Thank you Sharon
from Toronto Salsa Lessons / Classes for
your suggestions to make the newsletter
look like the website and profile younger
entrepreneurs like Jennifer Lopez.