论文部分内容阅读
国内A公司与外商签定了一笔进口钢材的合同,货物价值为504万美元,合同规定以信用证方式结算。 A公司依约对外开出信用证后,在信用证装期内,外商发来传真称货物已如期装运。不久开证行即收到议付行转来的全套单据,提单表明货物于某东欧港口装运,在西欧某港口转运至国内港口。单据经审核无不符点,开证行对外承兑。 A公司坐等一个多月,货物依然未到,深感蹊跷,遂向伦敦海事局进行查询,反馈回来的消息是:在所述的装船日未有属名船只在装运港装运钢材。由此断定这是一起典型的以伪造单据进行的信用证诈骗。但此时信用证项下单据已经开证行承兑,且据议付行反馈回的信息,该行已买断票据,将融资款支付给了受益人。开证行被迫在承兑到期日对外付款,A公司损失惨重。
Domestic A Company signed a contract with foreign investors for the import of steel products, the value of which was US $ 5.04 million. The contract stipulated the settlement by letter of credit. A company opened the letter of credit in accordance with the contract, the letter of credit loading period, the foreign fax sent said the goods have been shipped as scheduled. Not long before the issuing bank received a full set of bills negotiated by the negotiating bank, the bill of lading indicated that the goods were shipped in a port of Eastern Europe and was transhipped to a domestic port at a port in Western Europe. Documents audited without any discrepancies, the issuing bank foreign acceptance. A company waiting for more than a month, the goods still have not arrived, deeply strange, then to the London Maritime Bureau for inquiries, the feedback is that: on the date of shipment there is no name ship only shipped in the port of shipment of steel. This concludes that this is a typical fraudulent document fraudulent letter of credit. However, at this moment, the documents under the letter of credit have been accepted by the issuing bank, and according to the information fed back by the negotiating bank, the bank has already bought the bills and paid the financing proceeds to the beneficiaries. The issuing bank was forced to make an outward payment on the due date of the acceptance and Company A suffered heavy losses.