"Lloyds or equivalent society/registry, shipping company’s/ shipping company’s agents certificate that the carrying vessel is registered and classified as Lloyds 100-A1 or its equivalent classification seaworthy and not more than 20 years old’"
We are importer of pulses and we have opened LC to our shipper in Australia, Our shipper request us to delete the above clause from the LC. BUt our bankers informed that this clause will not be deleted as this clause is must in the LC.
1) Kinldy clarfiy whether this clause comes under UCP Norms?.
2) Is there any possibility to amend this clause in any other way ./ words instead of deleting.
Nearly 150 containers are held up for us because of this single clause amendment. OUr shipper is not ready to ship the cargo unless this cluase amend.
To me the attitude of the issuing bank seems far out. I think they are on the wrong track. Suggest you check with other banks in your country.
the so called "Vessel Age + Classification Certificate" is something concerning Insurance. So check Insurance document, sometime, transport with Vessels having different characteristics are prohibited or under an extra insurance premium. If the insurance is provided by the issuing bank, this is a Must, in other case it could be discuss with Insurance Company and consequently requested in the Doc.Credit.
thanks for your reply.
I guess the issuing bank has made a step away interfering with commercial business which is not in normal line and it should refrain from doing that. However there could be several reasons behind this as to why bank insists on keeping this clause. Whether it has granted applicant with a facility and condition is C&F (i.e without insurance for carriage) and applicant could become bancrupcy.... etc. I think is an internal policy with the bank experiencing in the past some troubles when paying the goods, cargo was lost due to unseaworthy vessel and applicant become bancrupt. Banks always look to mitigate their risks when entering in such transactions. However smart applicants could provide issuing bank with alternateive solution such as a proof that goods are already covered an insurance policy/certificate.
finially our bankers agreed to amend the LC. We have provided them the insurance cover note which covered for the goods.
thanks for the all supports and your recommended suggestion.
Realize I am posting on an old thread here. Still hoping for help! We have fairly large contanershipment ex USA to India. India LC asking for 2 certificates:
1. vessel maintained equivalent to Lloyds 100A1
2. vessel is seaworthy and under 25 years
I can get the Lloyds 100A1 cert, I can get the vessel age cert but shipping company will not use the word 'seaworthy'.
Indian bank is refusing to amend LC, insisting on seaworthy.
Original booking was with MSC, and I knew I had received 'seaworthy' certificates from Maersk Line, so I checked with Maersk USA and they will no longer provide this either.
Customer's bank is insisting on this. We are at an impasse. But it would certainly be a shame to lose this business because of the word 'seaworthy'. I have tried explaining to customer that the Lloyds 100A1 certification is another way of stating that vessel is seaworthy, but their bank is saying the word is mandatory. They will not budge.
I ship regularly from Asia and Europe and have not encountered this 'seaworthy' problem before.
Any ideas? It seems sad that this deal could die for something that (in my opinion) appears to be so petty. We are selling CIF - insurance is our burden.
thanks for help