|
Question about MT-799'sAugust 21 2009 at 6:25 PM No score for this post | Anonymous (Login Chad1234) from IP address 64.12.117.71 |
| Just curious, but technically, can you not ask your bank to perform more than one MT-799 on your account at a time?
|
|
| Author | Reply |
Anonymous (Login DS981) 71.186.187.176 | Re: Question about MT-799'sNo score for this post | August 21 2009, 11:26 PM |
Depends whats said in the 799. Technically there shouldn't be a limit to the amount of 799's you could send on one account, especially if its only a Proof of Funds type of transaction. |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
 EagleONE (Login EagleUNOS) 192.251.226.206 | One at a time...No score for this post | August 22 2009, 6:17 AM |
You got to know how bank works.
Technically it shouldn't be a problem if you pay for it.
BUT, Sending simultaneous MT799 per account to different recipient is NOT the proper banking protocol.
One MT799 message at a time is the norm, and subsequent MT799 to either the same or different recipient subject to the expiry of the previous.
|
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
 will (Login clearverbiage) Banking Forum Group 220.255.7.147 | It DependsNo score for this post | August 22 2009, 10:32 AM |
Eagle,
It really depends.
MT 799 falls within Category 7 Documentary Credits & Guarantees.
If the account has a track record of having multiple transactions
goiing on at any one time and receipients are regular trading partners,
There is no reason as to why the bank will be concerned.
At any given time, there are several transactions going on and LC, BG,
SLC etc has to be confirmed or 705s, it stands to reason that a free format
message occurance will happen.
Though not likely but can happen, as such if it assist in the trade flow,
and if legitimare, there is no reason as to why the bank should have a qualm.
It also depends on the verbiage/content.
Will |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
 EagleONE (Login EagleUNOS) 85.214.73.63 | Re: Question about MT-799'sNo score for this post | August 22 2009, 10:59 AM |
WILL,
We are on the same page.
A MNC with a good cashflow and liquidity won't have any problem in issuing simultaneous MT799 provide these do not exceed its obligation to the bank.
|
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
Anonymous (Login Chad1234) 64.12.117.71 | Re: Question about MT-799'sNo score for this post | August 22 2009, 2:17 PM |
Thanks,
I kind of knew the answer but wanted to make sure I would not screw something up this week with a double request. |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
 will (Login clearverbiage) Banking Forum Group 220.255.7.171 | Re: Question about MT-799'sNo score for this post | August 24 2009, 9:48 PM |
Chad,
A simple way to resolve the problem in future is to have an account
in the counter party bank.
We have relations with most major banks and confirming stuff is made simpler.
If it is an attempt at fraud, the branch will signal their HQ and action
will be taken as you are an account holder too.
Trade is a lot easier as it is done desk to desk and cut off swifts,
Cat 5 is made a whole lot simpler and confirmation of notes in 10 minutes
in many instances.
With today's compliance procedures and CIP(customer Identification Protocols)
it is getting to be a pain to opening accounts but it is worth it.
Counter Party claims 'we have he PoP'call your friendly banker, submit the
contract and let them varify.
Guess who gets spanked if the PoP is not there.
1) Counter Party wants to know your ability to perform.
2) Commission agents need an assignment of proceeds
3) Requests of status of Bill of Ladings during nego. etc
It's only a suggestion.
will |
| Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. | |
|
|
|