Free · UCP 600

LC document checker (free, 17 rules)

Free pre-presentation LC document check. Enter LC terms and document-set summary; the tool runs 17 UCP 600 discrepancy patterns (articles 14, 18, 19, 20, 28, 30, 31) and flags issues with the article reference. For full UCP 600 plus ISBP coverage on a raw MT700 paste, use the Pro version at /tools/documentation/lc-document-checker.

Last updated 2026-05-17. Math runs in your browser, no data leaves your computer.

General guidance only, not legal or professional engineering advice. Verify against the cited primary sources (IMDG, REACH, ChAFTA, RCEP, Customs Tariff Act, supplier SDS, etc.) before committing to a shipment, declaration, or contract. Sourzi assumes no liability for outcomes based on these calculators.

LC terms

Document set summary

17 UCP 600 discrepancy rules covered
UCP 600 Article 14, 19 to 28

Shipment date

Trigger: BL on-board date is after the LC latest-shipment date.

Fix: Confirm BL is dated on or before LC 44C; if late, request LC amendment before presentation.

UCP 600 Article 14(c) and 33

Presentation period

Trigger: Documents presented more than the LC presentation period (default 21 days) after BL on-board date.

Fix: Couriers and presentation must complete within the period stated at LC field 48 (default 21 days under UCP 600 article 14(c)).

UCP 600 Article 31

Partial shipments

Trigger: Multiple BLs presented when LC field 43P says NOT ALLOWED.

Fix: Where 43P is NOT ALLOWED, present a single BL covering the full LC quantity.

UCP 600 Articles 19 to 22

Transhipment

Trigger: BL shows transhipment (multiple vessels) when LC field 43T says NOT ALLOWED.

Fix: For NOT ALLOWED, use a direct vessel. Note that UCP 600 articles 20(c) and 21(c) treat container-to-container transhipment as permitted on through BLs even where 43T says NOT ALLOWED, but the bank may still query.

UCP 600 Article 14(j)

Beneficiary spelling

Trigger: Beneficiary name on commercial invoice does not match LC field 59 character-for-character.

Fix: Reproduce the LC 59 spelling exactly. UCP 600 article 14(j) allows minor address variations but not name variations.

UCP 600 Article 14(j)

Applicant spelling

Trigger: Applicant name on commercial invoice / BL consignee does not match LC field 50.

Fix: Reproduce the LC 50 spelling exactly.

UCP 600 Article 30

Amount tolerance

Trigger: Invoice total is outside the LC tolerance (LC field 39A or, where 39A is absent, the default 10 percent for "about", "approximately", or weight-and-quantity allowance per UCP 600 30(b)).

Fix: Confirm 39A or default tolerance; reduce or split shipment to fit.

UCP 600 Article 18(c)

Goods description

Trigger: Commercial invoice goods description does not match LC field 45A. Article 18(c) requires description on the commercial invoice to correspond to the description in the credit; the BL and other documents allow general terms not in conflict.

Fix: Match LC 45A verbatim on the invoice. Other documents (BL, packing list, certificate of origin) may use general terms but must not contradict the LC.

UCP 600 Article 20(a)(iii)

Port of loading

Trigger: BL port of loading does not match LC field 44E (or 44A taking-in-charge).

Fix: Confirm vessel sails from the LC port of loading.

UCP 600 Article 20(a)(iii)

Port of discharge

Trigger: BL port of discharge does not match LC field 44F.

Fix: Confirm BL is consigned to the LC port of discharge.

UCP 600 Article 20(a)(ii)

On-board notation

Trigger: BL is missing the "Shipped on Board" notation OR the on-board date.

Fix: Confirm with the carrier; the on-board notation and date are mandatory under article 20.

UCP 600 Article 20(a)(iv)

BL original set

Trigger: Less than full set of originals presented when LC requires "full set 3/3 originals".

Fix: Present all originals stated on the BL face. Lost originals require an indemnity letter from the bank.

UCP 600 Article 14

Required document missing: CO

Trigger: LC field 46A requires a Certificate of Origin and the document set does not include one.

Fix: Request CO from CCPIT, CIQ, or the relevant chamber of commerce; couriers and presentation must complete within the LC presentation period.

UCP 600 Article 14, 28

Required document missing: insurance

Trigger: LC field 46A requires an insurance certificate or policy and the document set does not include one.

Fix: Issue insurance certificate per LC; cover at least 110 percent of CIF / CIP value per UCP 600 article 28(f).

UCP 600 Article 14

Required document missing: CoA

Trigger: LC field 46A requires a Certificate of Analysis and the document set does not include one.

Fix: Issue per-batch CoA; cross-reference batch number to BL marks and packing list.

UCP 600 Article 14

Required document missing: packing list

Trigger: LC field 46A requires a packing list and the document set does not include one.

Fix: Issue packing list paired with the commercial invoice (Sourzi /tools/documentation/packing-list-generator).

UCP 600 Article 18(b)

Currency

Trigger: Invoice currency does not match LC field 32B.

Fix: Re-issue invoice in the LC currency. Article 18(b) requires invoice currency to match LC currency.

LC document checking in chemical-trade context

Letter of credit presentations live or die on UCP 600 article 14: "documents will be examined to determine, on their face, whether or not they appear to constitute a complying presentation". The examining bank (issuing or nominated) has 5 banking days to decide. If the bank finds discrepancies, the bank issues a refusal under article 16, and the beneficiary either fixes the discrepancies and re-presents (often impossible if the LC has already expired), gets the applicant to waive (rare), or accepts the cargo on documentary collection terms (loses LC protection). Discrepancy is the single biggest pain point in LC-financed chemical trade.

The most common discrepancies are predictable. Late shipment (BL on-board date after LC 44C). Late presentation (documents presented more than 21 days after BL on-board date, or whatever LC 48 specifies). Partial shipment when 43P says NOT ALLOWED. Transhipment when 43T says NOT ALLOWED (subject to UCP 600 articles 20(c) and 21(c) on container through-BLs). Beneficiary spelling mismatch between LC 59 and commercial invoice. Goods description on invoice not matching LC 45A (article 18(c) requires correspondence; minor variations on the BL and other documents are tolerated under article 14(e)). Currency mismatch (article 18(b)). Missing required document (CO, CoA, insurance, packing list). Less than full original set of BL.

This tool runs the 17 most common rule-based checks against the LC terms and the document set. Each flagged discrepancy comes with the UCP 600 article reference and a suggested fix. The tool is rule-based, not AI-based; it catches exactly what the rules describe and nothing more. For full UCP 600 plus ISBP coverage on a raw pasted MT700 (the format your bank actually sends), the Pro version at /tools/documentation/lc-document-checker runs the same rule engine plus the ISBP 745 layer on signature, freight notation, insurance amount, and consignee checks. The AI-based variant for subjective discrepancies (47A clauses, charterparty BL acceptability, SBLC special clauses) ships in Phase 3 at /tools/documentation/lc-document-checker-ai-powered.

Run this tool the day before the BL is issued. The fixable discrepancies (currency, beneficiary spelling, goods description, missing CO) are cheaper to fix at the BL-draft stage than at the bank presentation stage. The non-fixable discrepancies (latest shipment date about to lapse, partial shipment when NOT ALLOWED) are easier to triage early: amend the LC, switch to documentary collection, or re-route through a confirming bank that has more discretion under article 16.

For the LC terms decoder (paste an MT700 message and decode each tag), see Sourzi /tools/finance-and-payment/lc-terms-decoder-rule-based. For trade-finance fundamentals, see /tools/finance-and-payment/payment-term-cost-calculator.

Frequently asked

What does this tool do?

Paste the LC terms and your document set (commercial invoice, BL, packing list). The tool runs the most-common UCP 600 discrepancy patterns against the inputs and flags potential issues before presentation. It is a rule-based check, not an AI review; the heuristics catch the obvious traps but cannot replace a documentary-credit professional review for high-value LCs.

How does it handle the LC text?

The tool extracts standard SWIFT MT700 tags from pasted text (44C latest shipment date, 43P partial shipments, 43T transhipment, 50 applicant, 59 beneficiary, 32B currency, 45A goods description, 44E / 44F ports, 46A documents required, 48 presentation period). For inputs entered as structured fields, the tool uses the field values directly.

What does it not catch?

Subjective and language-sensitive issues: third-party documents acceptable per 47A clause; charterparty BL acceptability; bill-of-exchange tenor on usance LCs; SBLC vs commercial LC special clauses. For these, run an LC professional review (DOCDEX, ICC Banking Commission, your bank trade-finance desk) on the LC at issuance and on the document set before presentation.

Related tools