URR 725 Article 12: Duplications of a Reimbursement Authorization – CDCS Guide

Article 12 – Duplications of a Reimbursement Authorization

Clause 1: “An issuing bank must not, upon receipt of documents, give a new reimbursement authorization or additional instructions unless they constitute an amendment to, or a cancellation of, an existing reimbursement authorization.”

Explanation: This clause emphasizes that once the issuing bank has provided a reimbursement authorization, it should not issue another authorization or any additional instructions unless they serve the purpose of amending or canceling the previous authorization. Essentially, this prevents the confusion and potential financial discrepancies that could arise from having multiple reimbursement authorizations for the same transaction.

Example: Suppose Bank A issues a reimbursement authorization to Bank B for $100,000 against a letter of credit (LC). Later, upon receiving the shipping documents, Bank A realizes there is an error in the amount. Instead of issuing a new reimbursement authorization for $95,000, Bank A should amend the original authorization to reflect the correct amount. Issuing a new authorization could lead to both $100,000 and $95,000 being reimbursed, causing a duplication.

Clause 2: “If the issuing bank does not comply with the above and a duplicate reimbursement is made, it is the responsibility of the issuing bank to obtain the return of the amount of the duplicate reimbursement.”

Explanation: If the issuing bank fails to follow the rule outlined in Clause 1 and, as a result, a duplicate reimbursement is made, the issuing bank bears the responsibility for recovering the duplicate amount. This clause ensures that the issuing bank is accountable for any errors or miscommunications leading to multiple reimbursements for the same transaction.

Example: Continuing from the previous example, if Bank A mistakenly issues a second reimbursement authorization without canceling or amending the first one, and both $100,000 and $95,000 are reimbursed, Bank A would be responsible for recovering the extra $95,000 from the beneficiary or any other party involved.

Clause 3: “The reimbursing bank assumes no liability or responsibility for any consequences that may arise from any such duplication.”

Explanation: This clause absolves the reimbursing bank of any responsibility for issues arising from duplicate reimbursements caused by the issuing bank’s failure to comply with the previous clauses. The reimbursing bank is merely executing instructions as provided and cannot be held liable for any mistakes made by the issuing bank.

Example: If Bank B, acting as the reimbursing bank, pays out both the $100,000 and $95,000 as instructed, it cannot be held accountable for the over payment. The onus falls entirely on Bank A to rectify the situation, as Bank B is only responsible for following the instructions provided by Bank A.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Banking Digits

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading