Top 10 Letter of Credit Discrepancies

Top 10 Letter of Credit Discrepancies

Discrepancy can be defined as an error or defect, according to the issuing bank, in the presented documents compared to the documentary credit, the UCP 600 rules or other documents that have been presented under the same letter of credit.

According to the LC Market Intelligence Survey conducted by DC-Pro in year 2005 the average discrepancy rate on first time presentations under export letters of credit is 56%.

Although the report is quite out-dated, the figures are presumably almost identical today.

Discrepancies create problems especially for the exporters.

Once the documents are rejected, the issuing banks can only pay the credit amount, if and only if the importers accept the discrepancies.

Leaving the payment decision to the importers’ hands is a great deal of frustration for the exporters.

There are many reasons why exporters present discrepant documents, but the most important ones are:

  • lack of knowledge,
  • could not understand the letter of credit mechanism and
  • underestimating the risk factors associated with the letter of credit transaction.

On this page, you can find 10 most frequently seen discrepancies with examples in letters of credit.

Discrepancy Number 1 : Inconsistency in Documents

UCP 600 states that “Data in a document, when read in context with the credit, the document itself and international standard banking practice, need not be identical to, but must not conflict with, data in that document, any other stipulated document or the credit.

So if banks find inconsistency between documents, they raise a discrepancy.

Discrepancy Number 2 : Incorrect Data

Information any one of the document presented is not comply with the letter of credit terms and conditions.

Banks examine the documents under a letter of credit according to the letter of credit rules in order to determine whether the presentation is complying or not.

According to Article 2, a complying presentation means a presentation in accordance with the terms and conditions of the credit, the applicable provisions of the UCP 600 and international standard banking practice.

As a result if banks find out that at least one of the letter of credit condition is not indicated on the presented documents, they raise a discrepancy.

Discrepancy Number 3 : Late Shipment

Goods shipped after the permitted shipment date or period.

If date of the transport document such as the bill of lading date corresponds to a later date than the latest date of shipment stipulated in the credit, then banks raise the late shipment discrepancy.

Example: Multimodal Bill of Lading Late Shipment Discrepancy

Discrepancy Number 4 : Late Presentation

Documents presented later than 21 days after shipment or after the number of dates stipulated in the letter of credit.

If the credit is silent on the latest date of presentation, then you have to present your letter of credit documents within 21 days after “the date of shipment”.

But please keep in mind that this period can be shorten by the credit. As a result you need to read your credit very carefully in order to determine your presentation period.

Discrepancy Number 5 : Letter of Credit Expired

Documents presented after the letter of credit has expired.

Normally banks should not accept any documents that have been presented after the expiry date of the credit.

However, banks left the final decision to the applicants on this regard by evaluating the late presentation as a discrepancy.

Discrepancy Number 6 : Absence of Documents

Documents required by the letters credit is missing. Missing document discrepancy may also cover insufficient number of original documents presentation.

For example, the UCP 600 demands presentation of all original insurance documents if the insurance document states that it is issued more than one original.

If it is clear on the insurance document that it is issued in two originals, then the beneficiary has to present both originals of the insurance documents. If the beneficiary presents only one original instead of two originals, then the issuing bank raises absence of documents discrepancy.

Example: All Originals of Insurance Policies Have Not Been Presented Discrepancy

Discrepancy Number 7 : Carrier Not Defined on the Bill of Lading

The name of the carrier on the bill of lading is not defined and bill of lading is not signed by the master, the carrier or an agent on behalf of the carrier or master.

UCP 600 Article 20 indicates that:

A bill of lading, however named, must appear to:
i. indicate the name of the carrier and be signed by:
the carrier or a named agent for or on behalf of the carrier, or
the master or a named agent for or on behalf of the master.

Any signature by the carrier, master or agent must be identified as that of the carrier, master or agent.

Any signature by an agent must indicate whether the agent has signed for or on behalf of the carrier or for or on behalf of the master.

If banks could not locate the name of the carrier on the face of the bill of lading, then they mention this point as a discrepancy.

Example: Carrier Not Identified and Bill of Lading Not Signed As Per UCP 600 Discrepancy

Discrepancy Number 8 : Incorrect Description of Goods

Description of goods indicated on the invoice and other trade documents differs from the description of goods stated in the credit.

According to the international standard banking practice, the description of the goods, services or performance shown on the invoice is to correspond with the description shown in the credit.

There is no requirement for a mirror image. For example, details of the goods may be stated in a number of areas within the invoice which, when read together, represent a
description of the goods corresponding to that in the credit.

A goods description indicated on any other document may be in general terms not in conflict with the goods description in the credit.

If banks determine that the description of the goods not corresponding to the letter of credit, they raise incorrect description of goods discrepancy.

Example: Description of Goods Discrepancy

Discrepancy Number 9 : Incorrect Endorsement / Absence of Endorsement

Bill of lading, insurance policy or draft (bill of exchange) not endorsed by the beneficiary of the credit.

Discrepancy Number 10 : Partial Shipment or Transshipment Effected Despite L/C Terms

Exporters have to be very careful with the partial shipments and transshipments.

Please read credit text and determine if credit allowed or not allowed partial shipments and transshipments.

Example: Partial Shipment Discrepancy

Certificate of Origin Discrepancies

certificate of origin discrepancies

Certificate of Origin can be regarded as an official document. The certificate of origin could be issued on paper or electronic form.

The certificate of origin verifies the country in which the goods to be exported were originally manufactured.

Although the certificate of origin could be issued by an exporter without requiring any additional certification, in most cases, the customs office in the importing country requires a certificate of origin to be issued either by

  • the chamber of commerce (Ordinary Certificates of Origin) or
  • custom authorities (Preferential Certificates of Origin).

Letter of credit rules allow presentation of all types of certificates of origin.

On this page, you can find most common certificate of origin discrepancies under letter of credit transactions.

Certificate of Origin Discrepancies

Important Definitions Regarding the Certificate of Origin

  • According to UCP 600, latest letter of credit rules, and international standard banking practices a certificate of origin should be issued by the entity specified in the letter of credit.
  • When a letter of credit does not state the name of an issuer of the certificate of origin, any institution could issue a certificate of origin.
  • When a credit requires the presentation of a certificate of origin, this will be satisfied by the presentation of a signed document that appears to relate to the invoiced goods and certifies their origin.
  • When a letter of credit demands the presentation of a specific form of certificate of origin such as a EUR1, ATR or GSP Form A, only a document in that specific form is to be presented. For example if credit calls for a EUR1, beneficiary can not present an ordinary certificate of origin issued by the chamber of commerce.
  • Consignee information, when shown, is not to conflict with the consignee information in the transport document. However, when a credit requires a transport document to be issued “to order”, “to the order of shipper”, “to order of issuing bank”, “to order of nominated bank (or negotiating bank)” or “consigned to issuing bank”, a certificate of origin may show the consignee as any entity named in the credit except the beneficiary.
  • When a credit has been transferred, the first beneficiary may be stated to be the consignee.

Origin of Goods Inconsistent with the Letter of Credit Discrepancy

certificate of origin inconsistent certificate of origin discrepancy

A certificate of origin should certify the origin of the goods.

When a letter of credit indicates the origin of the goods and requesting presentation of a certificate of origin, any reference to the origin of goods on the certificate of origin or another document, is not to conflict with the stated origin.

For example, when a letter of credit indicates “origin of the goods: Japan”, a certificate of origin or a statement on any stipulated document indicating a different origin of the goods is to be considered a conflict of data, discrepancy.

As per letter of credit rules and international standard banking practices a certificate of origin must certify the origin of the goods as indicated in the letter of credit.

If the issuing bank determines that the certificate of origin is not reflecting correct origin of goods, then the issuing bank raises a discrepancy, which is known as origin of goods inconsistent with the letter of credit.

Discrepancy Example: Origin of Goods Inconsistent with the Letter of Credit

A letter of credit has been issued in SWIFT format, subject to UCPURR latest version, with the following details:

Letter of Credit Conditions

Field 45A: Description of Goods and or Services:

Aluminum Round Bars 15000 kgs. Delivery Terms: FOB Port of Jebel Ali, Dubai, UAE Incoterms 2010.

Field 46A: Documents Required:

  • Duplicates of signed and stamped commercial invoices issued by the beneficiary stating this letter of credit number.
  • Certificate of Origin in 1 original and 2 copies issued by any chamber of commerce stating that goods are of United Arab Emirates origin.
  • Full set of original bill of lading clean shipped on board established to the order of issuing bank notify applicant marked freight collect.

The beneficiary presented a Certificate of Origin as shown on the below picture.

Certificate of Origin

certificate of origin example of wrong country of origin discrepancy

Discrepancy: Certificate of origin should have shown that the goods are of United Arab Emirates origin, but the certificate of origin shows that the goods are Turkish origin, which is a clear discrepancy.

Reason for Discrepancy: A certificate of origin should certify the origin of the goods as indicated in the letter of credit.

Description of Goods Differs from the Letter of Credit Discrepancy

certificate of origin shows different description of goods

As per letter of credit rules and international standard banking practices a certificate of origin should not specify description of goods different than what is stated in the letter of credit.

A certificate of origin is to appear to relate to the invoiced goods, for example, by:

  • a goods description that corresponds to that in the credit or a description shown in general terms not in conflict with the goods description in the credit; or
  • referring to a goods description appearing in another stipulated document or in a document that is attached to, and forming an integral part of, the certificate of origin.

If the issuing bank finds out that the certificate of origin is showing different description of goods, the the issuing bank raises a discrepancy, which is known as description of goods on the certificate of origin differs from the letter of credit.

Discrepancy Example: Description of Goods Differs from the Letter of Credit

A letter of credit has been issued in SWIFT format, subject to UCPURR latest version, with the following details:

Letter of Credit Conditions

Field 45A: Description of Goods and or Services:

  • Leather Office Chairs 250 pcs. Delivery Terms: FOB Istanbul Port, Turkey Incoterms 2010.

Field 46A: Documents Required:

  • Original commercial invoice and five copies all duly signed in the name of applicant showing all the details of the goods and the prices as per proforma invoice no LY12141516 stating this letter of credit number.
  • Certificate of Origin in one original and two copies issued in the name of the applicant stating that the goods being exported are of Turkish Origin. This certificate of origin must be issued and authenticated by the chamber of commerce or union of industry in Turkey.
  • Full set of shipping company clean shipped on board marine bill of lading made out to the order of issuing bank notify applicant marked freight payable at destination.

The beneficiary presented a Certificate of Origin as shown on the below picture.

Certificate of Origin

certificate of origin sample

Discrepancy: The letter of credit requires shipment of “Leather Office Chairs”, but the certificate of origin describes the goods as “Imitation Leather Office Chairs”, which means that the description is representing a change in nature, classification or category of the goods.

Reason for Discrepancy: Description of goods on the certificate of origin should be shown in general terms but not in conflict with that stated in the letter of credit.

Certificate of Origin not Issued by the Chamber of Commerce Discrepancy

certificate of origin not issued by chamber of commerce discrepancy

The certificate of origin verifies the country in which the goods to be exported
were originally manufactured.(1)

The issuing body of the certificate of origin could be the government authority or a body empowered by the government.

Furthermore, the producer, manufacturer or exporter could also issue a certificate of origin by himself, either in self-issued certificate of origin or declaration of origin format.(2)

In regards to letter of credit rules, a certificate of origin is to be issued by the entity stated in the credit.

If the issuing bank determines that the certificate of origin is not issued as per letter of credit terms, then the issuing bank raises a discrepancy, which is known as certificate of origin is not issued by the entity as indicated in the letter of credit.

Discrepancy Example: Certificate of Origin not Issued by the Chamber of Commerce

A letter of credit has been issued in SWIFT format, subject to UCPURR latest version, with the following details:

Letter of Credit Conditions

Field 45A: Description of Goods and or Services: Motor Vehicle Parts 3500 pieces. As stated on order sheet 101, dated 20th April 2014. Delivery Terms: DAT Port of Bangkok Incoterms 2010.

Field 46A: Documents Required:

  • Signed and stamped commercial invoices in three originals issued by the beneficiary stating this letter of credit number.
  • 1 Original Certificate of Origin issued by the chamber of commerce
  • Full set of original bill of lading shipped on board established to the order of Bangkok Bank Public Company Limited notify applicant company marked freight prepaid.

The beneficiary presented a Combined Certificate of Origin and Value as shown on the below picture.

certificate of origin not issued by chamber of commerce discrepancy

Discrepancy: Certificate of Origin should have been issued by the chamber of commerce as per letter of credit terms, but the Combined Certificate of Origin and Value presented by the beneficiary has been issued by beneficiary’s himself.

Reason for Discrepancy: A certificate of origin must be issued by the organization specified in the letter of credit.

When a credit requires the presentation of a certificate of origin issued by a Chamber of Commerce, a certificate of origin would be acceptable which is issued by

  • Chamber of Commerce,
  • Chamber of Industry,
  • Association of Industry,
  • Economic Chamber,
  • Customs Authorities,
  • Department of Trade or the like…

But certificate of origin issued by the beneficiary instead of a chamber of commerce is not acceptable.

Certificate of Origin Presented Instead of a GSP Form A Discrepancy

certificate of origin discrepancy

The certificate of origin verifies the country in which the goods to be exported
were originally manufactured.

The certificate of origin could be issued on paper or electronic form.

The issuing body of the certificate of origin could be the government authority or a body empowered by the government.

Furthermore, the producer, manufacturer or exporter could also issue a certificate of origin by himself, either in self-issued certificate of origin or declaration of origin format.

Certificates of origin can be classified under two main groups:

  • Ordinary Certificates of Origin
  • Preferential Certificates of Origin

When a credit requires the presentation of a specific form of certificate of origin such as a GSP Form A, only a document in that specific form is to be presented.

Examples of Preferential Certificates of Origin: (Specific Form of Certificates of Origin)

  • Certificate of Origin GSP Form A
  • CAFTA-DR Certificate of Origin
  • North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Certificate of Origin
  • EUR1 Form Movement Certificate
  • ATR Movement Certificate

As per letter of credit rules and international standard banking practices a certificate of origin must be presented as outlined in the letter of credit.

If a beneficiary of a letter of credit presents a certificate of origin, which is not prepared in that specific form, banks raise a discrepancy, which is known as certificate of origin not presented in a specific form; such as that an ordinary certificate of origin presented instead of a GSP Form A.

Discrepancy Example: Certificate of Origin Presented Instead of a GSP Form A:

A letter of credit has been issued in SWIFT format, subject to UCPURR latest version, with the following details:

Letter of Credit Conditions

Field 45A: Description of Goods and or Services: Soccer uniforms 12500 pieces. As stated on order sheet 41, dated 10th March 2014. Delivery Terms: FOB Port of Chittagong Incoterms 2010.

Field 46A: Documents Required:

  • Signed commercial invoices in two originals showing letter of credit number and certifying that the merchandise is as per purchase order.
  • Original GPS FORM A Certificate of Origin signed by the exporter, authorized by the appropriate customs authorities under their stamp and signature dated not later than the transport document date and free of any remark such as “Simplified procedure” or words similar effect.
  • Full set of original bill of lading clean on board established to the order of The Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited notify applicant marked freight collect.

The beneficiary presented a certificate of origin as shown on the below picture.

Certificate of Origin

certificate of origin discrepancy gsp form a

Discrepancy: The letter of credit clearly requests a special form of a certificate of origin, which is GSP Form A. The beneficiary should have presented a specific GSP Form A certificate origin, whereas ordinary certificate of origin has been presented, instead.

Reason for Discrepancy: When a credit requires the presentation of a specific form of certificate of origin such as a GSP Form A, only a document in that specific form is to be presented.