Home › Forums › Letters of Credit

B/L:Part of Container, FCL-FCL

34 replies [Last post]
Wed, 04/23/2008 - 22:00
Sheilar T. Shaffer
Offline
Joined: 04/15/2008
Posts:
Printer-friendly versionPDF version

Dear all,

We (as a presenting bank) come across a B/L complying the requirements of UCP600 Art.20 and terms of the LC as well, except the following particulars shown on its face:

"one of three cargoes in container no.xxx"

"service type:FCL/FCL"

Is it  a discrepancy based on ISBP 681 Para.114?

Thank you

Sheilar

‹ Divisible Transferable LC - Legally enforceable ›
Top
Tue, 05/13/2008 - 07:04
#1
puschl
Offline
Joined: 05/13/2008
Posts:
Dear all, normally I would

Dear all,

normally I would reject the BL in case it is in FCL-FCL shipment. The 1st FCL means that at loading port and full loaded container is handed over to the carrier and the 2nd means that this full loaded container should be handed over at port of discharge. in this case that full container can be handed over only against presentation of all existing BLs for all goods in the container. In case you have an FLC-LCL or LCL-LCL container, the container will be destuffed at port of discharge and and consignee will receive only the goods mentioned on that single BL. In case of FCL at port of discharge the whole container itself must be handed over (not destuffed). So it depends on the condition FCL or LCL whether this BL can be accepted or not.

 Puschl 

Top
Wed, 05/07/2008 - 03:20
#2
leechiankoh
Offline
Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts:
FCL/ Part of/ LCL Shipment

Hi,

Here is the meaning of FCL, part of shipment and LCL.

FCL (Full Container Load) means a full container shipped by a shipper to a consignee.

Part of Shipment means 2 or more shipper load their goods into same container to ship to same consignee.

LCL (Less Than Container Load)  is common term for an amount of goods to be shipped and which do not fill an entire container. Thus, consolidation of several LCL loads from different places or shippers into a full container. Different shipper ship to different consignee respectively. 

Hope it will help.

TQ and have a nice day!

Best Regard

leechian (email: leechian.koh@bpplastics.com.my)

 

 

Top
Thu, 04/24/2008 - 05:46
#3
ghubshawi
Offline
Joined: 11/17/2007
Posts:
Check the Weight

 I beleive that the documents should be checked on the basis of the documents alone, however, I think you can also have a glance on the weight of the goods appeared on the b/l whether matching the size of the container utilized or not.

best,

Ghubshawi

Top
Thu, 04/24/2008 - 18:07
#4
Sheilar T. Shaffer
Offline
Joined: 04/15/2008
Posts:
Interesting suggestion

Dear Ghubshawi,

An interesting suggestion!  How to do it then?  Would you mind giving some tips ?

Thank you

Sheilar

Top
Wed, 04/23/2008 - 22:59
#5
pan
Online
Joined: 09/13/2007
Posts:
114 ISBP

Hi friend, art 114 refers to a clause in b/l such as:

"Partload together with b/l n....... ; goods only to be released against joint presentation of all original b/l n........... + b/l n....," or similar sentence. I dont understand if the clause in your b/l has the same meaning; Does it refer to one container or more ? FCL means that the container has been loaded with goods belonging to the same destinatary !!! Or, in this case, a part of goods has been shipped in one container and the rest in another container, together with goods belonging to different consignees (LCL).

Is it a b/l containing "For delivery of goods please apply to... clause or the like ?

However with details here given b/l, IMHO, is not discrepant.

Ciao

Top
Thu, 04/24/2008 - 02:43
#6
Sheilar T. Shaffer
Offline
Joined: 04/15/2008
Posts:
Hi Pan

Thanks for your response.

Just something to clarify:

No such wording as "for delivery of goods please apply to ... clause "or the like.

But we have different understanding of those notation in the B/L:

"One of three cargoes in container no.xxx" ---- I'm sure it means that the LC cargo only represents 1/3 part of the container no.xxx .   So there should be other 2 sets of bills  for the said container.

As for "FCL-FCL", really not quite sure about it.   If it means the container should be released only against all the B/L invoived,  then it would be troublesome.

Best regards

Sheilar

 

Top
Thu, 04/24/2008 - 12:24
#7
Frammi
Offline
Joined: 08/17/2007
Posts:
You have correctly answered your question!

One of x(part) cargo under a LCL/FCL or FCL/FCL shipment means that only if all B/Ls are presented, can any of the goods be delivered.

Even more than that, the container has not yet been unloaded!"

So in any case a one of x(part) cargo under a LCL/FCL or FCL/FCL is a discrepancy!!

 

-Each long journey starts with a small step-

Best regards

Frammi

Top
Thu, 04/24/2008 - 18:10
#8
Sheilar T. Shaffer
Offline
Joined: 04/15/2008
Posts:
Nice conclusion

Dear Frammi,

You have given me a nice conclusion, much better than I have known it!

Thanks

Sheilar

Top
Fri, 04/25/2008 - 02:37
#9
Armagedo
Offline
Joined: 09/10/2007
Posts:
Hi! Sorry, but just after

Hi!

Sorry, but just after posting with all this FCL-LCL things was forced to go out of the office.

Thanks to Frammi for his kind further explanation and conclusion.

But just some words (but there will be a lot of them ;-))).

How to treat this B/L?

IMHO, here is one more dilemma. Again :))))

Mentioned ISBP para clearly states that such B/L will be not acceptable in case "If a bill of lading states that the goods in a container are covered by that bill of lading plus one or more other bills of lading, and the bill of lading states that all bills of lading must be surrendered, or words of similar effect"

Taking into account "or words of similar effect" and "One of three cargoes in container no.xxx" we may conclude that  the goods in a container are covered by that bill of lading plus AT LEAST one other bill of lading.

But where is the second IMPORTANT condition which makes this article 114 applicable, i.e. from where we see that "the bill of lading states that all bills of lading must be surrendered"?????

Basing on info provided - there is no such clear indication.

From where we do got it? - Only after examination of all this FCL-LCL things.

But, please, answer in all sincerity - is this obligation of the bank/doc checker to check this terms and more over to make any decision basing on this?

IMHO, no. These terms are not internationally agreed and approved. These are terms used (or even better to say that we may only suppose that 'they are used') within specific field of activity - container transportation. As far as there is no strict and internationally accepted meaning of such a words as FCL-LCL and their combination there may be only sugestions what do they mean.

This is the same as CIF Incoterms 2000 and just CIF. If the first one is clearly understood as INternational COmmercial TERM (with all consequances) then the second one (just CIF) may be of any meaning.

So the same is here. I've got at least two other interpretations of FCL 

FCL = Framework Class Library

FCL = Feedback Control Loop

Why they are not applicable here?

Maybe if we will learn more about these new abbreviation expansions we'll found that they are also good? :)))))))))

So, here is dilemma:

Choice 1: Basing on info provided, having no clear rstriction 'that all bills of lading must be surrendered' at the B/L in question and having no obligation to check meaning of internally used abbreviations such as FCL/LCL etc the document by itself should be accepted as COMPLIANT.

But the world is cruel and we're not just observers. :)) We do suggested that this reffers to container transportation, do found the meaning of that types of services, investigated them and have

Choice 2:  under type of services stated it can be that Applicant will have a problems with safe and smooth receipt of the goods under such a B/L.

Whether he will have difficulties or not we don't know at the moment, but we may forecast :)))

What to choose?????

I would chose Choice 2 :))))

=========================

I may suggest from where this FCL/FCL is coming.

It seems that Applicant has bought from the Beneficiary three cargoes loaded into this one container (one part of which has been covered by this LC and other two by other payment agreements).

Then, if there is STRAIGHT NAMED consignee in B/L (without any 'to the order (of)') then it is understoodable that in respect of consignee it is clear FCL/FCL type of service - the goods has been taken from one single shipper and will be delivered and released to one and sole consignee.

Thus, IMHO, the only problem for this B/L which make it discrepant is incorrect statement of types of services: if they wouldn't be stated at all (who has asked for this???? :) ) or stated as FCL/LCL or LCL/LCL service the document would be compliant.

Any other suggestions?

Good luck

Top
Fri, 04/25/2008 - 19:48
#10
Sheilar T. Shaffer
Offline
Joined: 04/15/2008
Posts:
Something in my own perspective

Hi Armagedo,

Thank you for your passionate post on this issue.  Really appreciated.

Just something in my own perspective:

Yes, I agree with you that ISBP 114 doesn't refer us to such terminology as FCL/FCL etc.  But it does have wording like "words of similar effect", which may lead to some practical interpretations.

It's however fair to say that no single publication can cover /anticipate all the terms and their interpretations related to L/C and the standard practice it reflects. ( no exception of UCP600 and ISBP681)   But it doesn't mean that bankers should be supposed to be ignorant of anything elss but UCP.  In this point,  I'd like to refer to ISBP113, which requires us to pay attention to the transportation terminology like FI, FO......  Also please look up TA99 in ICC Pub no.660, which address the similar case like this one.  The conclusion of ICC opinion shows us that although the B/L comply to the credit terms and the requirement of UCP, if it otherwise unfavourably restricts the delivery of the LC cargo, then would constitute the ground for rejection.

So how about this one:  Part of Container, but FCL-FCL?

Best regards

Sheilar

 

Top