Amended: 1st August 2012
UNIFORM RULES AND PRACTICE FOR INTERMEDIARIES AND BROKERS
Further Enhanced Internet and E-mail Trading Applications
URPIB may be applied by those intermediaries who have purchased and studied TWIY 2013, FYBR, ITSI or WTMW Doctrine once such a trader declares a URPIB ‘Buyer/Seller’ status. Those who trade as per the Doctrine without declaring the URPIB status may not rely upon these Rules, but only the Doctrine. Those who trade with a Buyer/ Seller not declaring these Rules may not depend on these supporting Rules but only if the Doctrine. In effect, those who want to be associated with the same minded trading association rely upon and adhere to the virtues of both the Doctrine and these Rules. All advance applications apparent in these updated Rules are the latest Rules. URPIB Rules override matters of the Doctrine should conflict to the overall trading structure be apparent, in where, the Rules updates the trading premises effected. Specific updates made to these Rules, updates the FTN Exporting Trading Doctrine. URPIB Rules are about trading Rules that may be used by like-minded traders such as Intermediaries, Sellers, Buyers, Agents and Brokers in association with each other. Law Firms, Banks, Suppliers and End Buyers world-wide can also learn a great deal from these Rules as any entrepreneur dealing in related matters of Commercial Agency, both as it relates to actual matters of Agency and of matters on how such should be enacting the business of trade in an international arena. Matters of localised Laws and Rules are not addressed, as their Rules are applicable in the international arena of application.
All Rules are not Laws, but all Laws are Rules, superior Rules amongst many. URPIB Rules are an admixture of in-house Rules and in part fully supportive of standing Laws applicable in many Countries, if not all Countries, in some form, as it relates to the nature of business apparent. The trader bears personal consequence for failing to take notice and apply the virtues of URPIB, accordingly the strength of these very effective Rules apply very real support world-wide to those who remain within its protective bounds, and the wrath of such to those who fail to observe it virtues and guidance such Rules offers, to anyone delving in the related nature of business applied, much more so when enacted upon in support with the FTNX Doctrine.
Previous URPIB Rules where designed to help appease Sourcing Intermediaries, in assisting such to hold status as a Buyer/Seller. Nothing more than trivial matters have changed regarding the actual base trading structure since its release in 2005. All advanced or enhanced FTN Exporting Doctrines also enact with these Rules. The Rules have now returned to full definition as the Doctrine is now self-perpetuating. In 2010, ITSI was released by Publishers Gowers/ Ashgate U.K. and has attained best-selling status in May 2012. TWIY, FYBR, WTMW and ITSI are now circulating world-wide with thousands of Intermediaries, Buyers and Sellers studying its formidable and superior import-export trading premise daily, accordingly URPIB was issued originally with constraints. The soft First Edition version of these Rules was designed in a simpler manner, to explain Procedures to a new emerging trading professional. URPIB, as first released in 2005, has moved away from the ‘soft approach’ to deliver the Doctrine, more so specifically, aiming at the Buyer/Seller rather than the Sourcing Intermediary, as Sourcing Intermediaries have no position unless they take up the Buyer/Seller status or are attached to an informed Buyer/Seller. All Buyers/Sellers are Sourcing Intermediaries, but not all Sourcing Intermediaries are Buyers or Sellers. These Rules are now much more strictly defined, as there are enough practitioners world-wide from 2012 that understand the underlying theme of the Doctrine being delivered.
If an entity is only trading as a Sourcing Intermediary, without being attached to an informed Buyer/Seller, then trading in such a lone position is a wasted effort. Any Principal of Agency, in any industry, may use these Rules if such has studied the FTNX Doctrine, in where specific matters to do with international trade may be simply omitted, hence URPIB Rules are now ostensibly in part, a universal application as well, that can be applied in all Agency / Broker related dealings. The term ‘Buyer/Seller’ and ‘Principal’ are terms used with the general term ‘Intermediary’. Those who are intending to trade in the Buyer and Seller position dealing in exportable goods are also being referred in these Rules as the ‘Intermediary’ or ‘Principal’. The reading of these Rules hence applies as per the activity such Rules are being applied with. These Rules should not be used by an Intermediary who has not studied any FTN Exporting Doctrine, as interpretation of such rules can only be accurately applied fully with the said Doctrine. URPIB Rules, just like the Doctrine, has been through the long test of time and experience. Intermediaries trading under any other regime do so under huge risk and peril of consequence. There has never been a genuine Intermediary market, just an imaginary one, accordingly FTN Exporting has created the first Doctrine, as well as a true Intermediary market as a truly professional application (and profession), which are supported by Rules of Association. An entity using these Rules in trading situation may add on their correspondence the following statement without using the name of ‘FTN Exporting’.
Informed Buyer and Seller of exportable commodities Adhering to current ‘Uniform Rules and Practice for Intermediaries and Brokers World wide’ (URPIB)
The FTNX ‘Doctrine’ as referred in these Rules; as owned by its creator, as defined in any FTN Exporting created in-house publications, or formally published publication defined as ‘ITSI’(International Trade and the Successful Intermediary).
These rules carry copyright,and may be displayed on a web site in part or fully by any site owner who has purchased a FTN Exporting publication in where the creator of these rules ‘FTN Exporting ‘ is clearly mentioned.
© URPIB 2013
Amended: 1st July 2012
Ratified: 1st August 2012
© URPIB Rules of Trade 2005-2011. Full Revision: 1st July 2012
Copyright: FTN Exporting Australia 1988-2012
UNIFORM RULES AND PRACTICE FOR INTERMEDIARIES AND BROKERS
Further Enhanced Internet and E-mail Trading Applications
URPIB Article 1
Definition of an Intermediary
Under URPIB Rules, an Intermediary may be defined as a Seller, Buyer or ‘Buyer and Seller’ in the united form when such an entity is acting for an ‘undisclosed Principal’.
When an intermediary acts upon the united position the said intermediary many also express his position as a ‘Principal’ of Agency.
An intermediary may also be defined as a ‘Representative’ of a Principal, by using appropriate terms of reference, such as Sourcing Intermediary (SI), Broker or Agent, but only when acting on behalf a ‘disclosed Principal’.
It is an offence for any intermediary whether acting on behalf of a disclosed or undisclosed principal to wilfully and intentionally deceive ,make false statements ,supply false information and supply misleading information.
A professional intermediary not acting on behalf of a disclosed principal is an entity conducting business as a Buyer /Seller and Principal in its own right.
A Representative of a disclosed Principal is one who acts in the short term or long term under the expressed instructions of a named Principal as guided by such, at any given time, as specific to each matter being enacted upon.
An Agent or Broker acts upon a set of instructions unguided, within the bounds of such set of instructions, when representing a disclosed Principal over the longer term.
URPIB Article 2
Overall position of the Intermediary
A ‘Buyer’ defines to mean when one is enacting with a Supplier.
A Buyer purchases goods from a Supplier, in documentary form, without obtaining possession of such goods.
A Supplier is one who owns possession of goods they are offering for sale.
A ‘Seller’ defines to mean when one enacting with an End Buyer.
An End Buyer is one who obtains possession of ordered goods, as ordered from, and purchased from a seller.
Both positions, as held at the same time, in where, each position is apparent as it pertains to the side of business being enacted upon by the individual.
The said ‘side of business’, may also may be described in a manner to infer the ‘side of the fence’, in where one is trading upon or holding position in such, as it seems to all others.
An entity working as an independent ‘middle person’, individually or in a string contract, heading such, between two other Principal entities, shall also be known as ‘Principal’, in peerage amongst others, as one holding Principal of Agency – in rem, as it seems to all others.
All other Principal entities, who are not acting as an Intermediary, in a transaction being enacted upon, are in personam (a) the actual owner in possession of goods (or services being offered), also referred to as the ‘Supplier’ and (b) the person paying for the goods (or services sought) and taking possession of such– also referred to as the ‘End Buyer’.
Anyone who is conducting commercial business personally applied between two other Principals as a Buyer/Seller , is defined in the general term to be an ‘Intermediary’ looking to conduct business for personal gains and profits.
When commissions payments are being sought. This type of Intermediary is defined as a ‘Sourcing Intermediary’.
UIRPIB Article 3
Sourcing Intermediary (SI)
A Sourcing Intermediary best describes one or many, enacting in-between a Seller and a Supplier, or enacting in-between an End Buyer and Seller at any given time, or at the same time.
The first Sourcing Intermediary (SI) next to the said Seller or Buyer on the side of the transaction being enacted upon shall carry a special title under URPIB as ‘Primary Intermediary’ (PI) but only if the said ‘PI’ has disclosed that such is supported by a informed ‘Buyer/Seller’.
A Sourcing Intermediary is unable to claim or earn commission payment, if they are not expressly attached to a Principal assuring and protecting such a potential payment of any commission.
A Sourcing Intermediary holding only such a position, without attachment to a Principal, or attachment to a string contract supported by a Principal, is a flawed untenable position, in where such an Intermediary has no scope to ensure commissions can be secured.
Where a transaction is entered into, in where these Rules are not implied, said transaction is not supported by these Rules, in where the matters of the said Doctrine explicitly prevail.
It is the duty of the SI attached to a URPIB Buyer/ Seller to ascertain that such is an informed URPIB practitioner who also intends to conduct business within the parameters of the FTN Exporting Doctrine of Trade for Intermediaries.
The Intermediary conducts business with ‘acceptable’ type commodities and not those products not allowed to be traded upon, as specified under these Rules (or in the manner not allowed).
A Sourcing Intermediary, or anyone else, using these Rules may not imply or give inference that they are attached to a Principal in any form, unless they have expressed permission to do so over the short term, as it relates to one deal being enacted upon, or over the long term as per attachment conferred.
The term ‘attachment’ is specific to these Rules, meaning that the Intermediary is formally attached to, and working with a disclosed informed Buyer/ Seller following the edicts and virtues of the said Doctrine of association in the first instance, and these Rules in the second.
An Intermediary claiming to be acting for a disclosed Principal must disclose such a Principal upfront at the start of the transaction including anyone claiming Mandate-ship status.
Any Sourcing Intermediary, (or any entity) attached to a Principal, must declare such a representative status when acting for the said Principal, at all times, on all written correspondence and web site they own.
A web site giving the impression that the Intermediary is conducting business as a lone informed Buyer/ Seller, when in fact, such is replying upon and depending upon the expertise of another Principal to close a deal, must in some form, no matter how small, disclose the said Principal they reply upon on their web site.
Any other entity not in support by attachment to an informed Buyer / Seller, or declared disclosed Principal, is enacting upon a precarious, unsupported and flawed premise. Said premise, which is assumed to be ineffective, improper and unworkable.
The Principal of Agency shall, at all times, act in a honourable manner with its own attached Intermediaries and with other Principals.
Race, creed, lore, custom, political affiliation or religious beliefs play no part with the nature of business being enacted upon and that racial prejudice, or any assertions based on prejudicial matters, shall not be entertained nor tolerated by any Principal, or by those attached to such.
Matters of embargo are matters of Government and politics, and not individuals, in where, matters for Government in a repressed regime, are not matters related to individuals trading from such Countries, is the assumption.
In where, an Intermediary with good intent is trading from a Country where embargo applies, secures goods from one Country where no embargo applies, for selling to another where no embargo applies, such may seek protection under these Rules and may be attached to a Buyer/ Seller enacting and adhering to these Rules.
The Principal of a string contract, shall at all times, protect the lawful interests of any person they are involved with unconditionally, in where such is providing, or has provided valuable information which leads to the closing of a successful transaction.
The Principal of a string contract shall not enter into unlawful business Transactions.
An unlawful business application is not the same in meaning as applied to the meaning of an ‘illegal’ business transaction.
URPIB Article 4
Parties to a String Contract
A ‘string Contract’ is defined as a party enacting in a group situation as a whole, in the nature of business of buying and selling goods or services for gains or commissions, in where, one side of a deal commences with a Supplier in possession of goods or services and ends with an End Buyer willing to buy and take possession of such goods or accept services, in where everyone in between are defined as Intermediaries.
A string contract on any one side of the fence is a singled independent entity. Each member within the string contract is and independent entity. The whole string contract from Supplier to End Buyer is a single entity. All parts may seem to be the same entity , but each have their own application to rely upon and enact upon depending on the part of the string contract being addressed at any given time.
A whole string is just as important as each member forming such is the starting premise assumed. Those in a string who ‘earn’ more than others in the same string do so because of added efforts made or need to be made and not because one person is deemed to be more important than others associated in the same string contract.
The ultimate strength of the string contract is dictated by the strength of the live deal being enacted upon of which the ultimate goal of string formation becomes apparent for only such reason. All members of string contract must contribute in reaching the ultimate goal.
Once the optimum strength of the string formation has been initiated, it is the duty of the Principal to ensure “to the best of their abilities’ that all interests of each individual, forming the active string contract is fully protected and supported.
All transaction involving a string Contract must have 3 (three) Principals apparent. The Supplier, the Buyer and Seller in the combined form, as well as the End Buyer.
A head of a ‘string Contract’, in control of a transaction in a string deal, as the head of the string deal, is holding the combined position of Buyer/ Seller is a ‘Principal’.
The term ‘union in trinity’, is specific in meaning, that even though 3 (three) said Principals to a Contract may prevail, as it pertains to the commercial aspects of business application being applied, in where, the ‘meeting of minds’ of the transacting party has led to such a Contract formation and signing, in where, each said Principal are independent entities bearing personal liabilities and obligations to the nature of business being applied, each bearing fiduciary or legal consequences of their own actions.
Sourcing Intermediaries are not allowed to be a signatory of a Contract.
The Sourcing Intermediary may, or may not, appear on any Quote or Offer of the Principal or Primary Intermediary they represent. In where, the discretion to apply such is for the Primary Intermediary to apply in the first instance, in where, the Principal is notified of such.
In a scenario, whether or not other ‘Sourcing Intermediaries’ are involved within a transaction, the parties to a string Contract are as follows (a) Supplier, with or without a Mandated Agent. (b) Buyer and Seller, with or without a Primary Intermediary or representatives. (c) End Buyer, with or without a Mandated Agent.
Where Sourcing Intermediaries are involved, the group to the transaction to be implied in similar mode: (a) Supplier (b) Sourcing Intermediaries (one or many) (c) Buyer/ Seller (middle person in control of the whole deal, the Principal of Agency) (d) Sourcing Intermediaries (one or many) (e) End buyer
If a ‘Mandate holder’ has disclosed his Principal, or produced a written Mandate-ship Agreement, as issued by his claimed Principal, and if such a Mandate ship has been authenticated as being genuine, the said Mandated Agent is treated as an Agent of the Principal, to which such is treated as if they are the Supplier or End Buyer in a string Contract.
The ‘middle person’, who leads a trading group of ‘Sourcing Intermediaries’, is also referred to as a Buyer and Seller of goods being secured or offered, as well as Principal of Agency.
A Principal of Agency may confer Mandate-ship of his Agency to authorised representatives of such, who must disclose such a representation status where such is specifically acting on behalf of his or her disclosed Principal, for one transaction or when representation is ongoing.
An attached or unattached entity, using the name of the Principal to obtain a favourable position in a transaction, for their own private benefit, is acting dishonourably. Likewise, a Principal doing the same while using information provided by those attached directly, or indirectly, in stealth, is acting dishonourably.
Once the name of a Principal is used for the benefit of those associated with such, then the Principal is heading any potential transaction and is entitled to secure personal gains from such an association, and protect commission to those attached.
An unsupported informed or ill informed Intermediary, seeking attachment and support of informed URPIB Buyer/ Seller, shall not seek attachment with any other Buyer/ Seller until such has cancelled support of one, to take up support of another.
As stated by the term ‘informed’, such a term signifies one who has studied the said Doctrine and agrees to adhere to these URPIB Rules. Such an informed Intermediary has status over ill informed Intermediaries.
A Primary Intermediary (PI), once declared, has status over all other Intermediaries other than the Principal. Only the Principal may confer the status of Primary Intermediary. A Primary Intermediary, once identified, is an Agent of a disclosed Principal; even if such is called upon by the Principal to examine a potential transaction (for a share of allotted commission) such did not secure or initially was involved in at inception.
All Intermediaries seeking attachment of an informed Buyer/ Seller, must ‘step back’ to such and disclose information to a Principal before such Principal may entertain matters of first time attachment.
Once first time attachment is conferred, subsequent attachment applies automatically whenever a Principal accepts to service the inquiry of the SI, until such an attachment is cancelled, whether implied or expressed, by the Intermediary holding such attachment or by the Principal conferring such.
No cancellation of attachment, even if advised formally in expressed form, shall be made effective until all matters of any current business has been settled.
The Principal shall not rely upon or use any information surrendered once an attachment has been cancelled, other than in the manner specified herein.
A Principal of Agency bears legal responsibilities , liabilities and consequences for the acts applied by those those attached to such, accordingly a the said principal may immediately unattached any entity failing to follow the directives of the principal, if such a principal feels, for good specified reason , that others have placed the said principal in a legally precarious situation.
Wilfully placing a Principal in a legally precarious position is an dishonourable act.
Any dishonourable act once clearly ascertained, allows a principal to (a) recover cost of any potential loss of gains(b) allows a principal to drop a SI from a string formation (c) allows a Principal to continually use information submitted (d) allow a Principal not to collect and pay commission to such a dishonourable entity in where any such commission forfeited , is shared amongst others in the same string formation.
A Buyer/ Seller is not an expert of the Product they sell and may become, in part, expert of such by default. The Supplier of a Product is the expert of the goods they sell and is expected to advise such Product accordingly.
A Buyer/ Seller of commodities, is an expert at the buying and selling of such a Product internationally and the process required to enact such matter in a safe effective and appropriate manner, in where, such shall not advise an End Buyer matters of the actual Product they are offering if unsure, but shall always advise properly, matters of Procedure.
URPIB Article 5
Stepping Back Applications.
An informed Intermediary and Principal of Agency, as well as all those providing support or services to such, no matter the nature of Agency type of business apparent, is one who has studied the said Doctrine of trade intently and has agreed to conduct business under the auspices of such a Doctrine, in where, such also supports the application of these Rules in the course of business they are plying.
A Supplier or End Buyer are not bound by these Rules, but may be ostensibly bound by such due to the nature of business enacted upon.
For the purpose of these Rules, a Principal Buyer/ Seller is different from the other Principal entities to a string deal, in that, the defined Principal shall only be able to proceed in a transaction as a person holding and transferring Title or leading Delivery Documents of the goods being transacted upon, without ever taking actual or physical ‘possession’ of such goods.
A ‘Sourcing Intermediary’ is not a Principal. Sourcing Intermediaries answer directly to the Buyer/ Seller heading a string Contract or officially titled Primary Intermediary (PI) representing such.
A Primary Intermediary answers to his Principal heading Agency. All others in a string Contract are answerable to the Primary Intermediary, if such is apparent in a string deal.
Where the Buyer/ Seller is advising his immediate Primary Intermediary, the Primary Intermediary is responsible for advising all other Intermediaries properly, on that side of the transaction.
All other said Intermediaries invited to be a part of a string Contract not holding PI status or Principal status, are defined as Sourcing Intermediaries (SI) outright.
There cannot be an intermediate ‘Buyer’ and another intermediate ‘Seller’ acting as the single controlling entity in a string Contract.
Two entities holding Buyer/ Seller status cannot trade with each other unless one party ‘steps back’ to the other. The entity holding supply steps back to the entity that does not (at their discretion to accept ‘stepping back’ process). The entity ‘stepping back’ is conferred PI status for that one transaction.
Amendment: 30th September 2012
Re : Article: 5 Par (9) Noted From: James Gard email@example.com
Correction as defined .Two entities holding Buyer/ Seller status cannot trade with each other unless one party ‘steps back’ to the other. The entity not holding supply steps back to the entity who does. (at their discretion to accept ‘stepping back’ process). The entity ‘stepping back’ is conferred PI status for that one transaction.
Once one Buyer/ Seller ‘steps back’ to another,the one ‘stepping back’ is conferred a honorary PI status for the deal being enacted upon, as it relates to commission share, not effecting the secured position of the actual PI of the Principal and the work he is obligated to perform.
The primary rule amongst all others, when confusion is apparent on the matter of status, is settled once the entity holding supply is identified and declared.
A Principal acting as Buyer, is acting in such a position to his disclosed Supplier. A Principal acting as Seller, is acting in such a position to his disclosed End Buyer. As disclosed to that side of the deal being enacted upon with the Principal, in where, the undisclosed position applies thereafter when the buy/sell transaction becomes apparent to all others involved in the same deal.
A Buyer/ Seller cannot make an ‘Offer to Buy’ goods or ‘Offer to Sell’ goods, unless the matter of Supplier and/ or matters of End Buyer are first made fully apparent.
Badly informed or flawed terms often seen in Intermediary string deals such as amongst others: LOI, RWA, ICPO, NCND, BCL, POP, PB, MPA, ASWP are not entertained by a practitioner of the said Doctrine of trade or URPIB Rules unconditionally.
In where, a combination of flawed Procedures and correct or acceptable Procedures are apparent, the Intermediary may attempt to rectify the flawed part of any ‘Offer’ made, before proceeding upon the course of the looming transaction, but only where the majority of information has been advised correctly in the first instance.
An Intermediary shall not give vital information to anyone producing a flawed ‘Offer’, or advice which may lead in converting an otherwise flawed ‘Offer’ into an effective ‘Offer’ by default, in where, matters of enabling ‘due diligence’ to apply on the original information given is circumvented.
URPIB Article 6
Matters of Sourcing
An ‘informed’ entity who has become a specialist in sourcing End Buyers and/ or Suppliers as per the FTN Exporting Doctrine is said to be a informed Sourcing Intermediary (SI) is the assumption.
The assumptions arrived of the informed SI is based in the idea that such has become a specialist and is further defined as one who has become, over time, a very skilled and informed in the activity they have learned about, studied about, over a long period of time including the act of sourcing and the act of documentation production as it relates to the nature of business being applied at any particular time, in-line with, and in support of,these Rules and said Doctrine.
An entity able to secure a Principal, but who produces bad or poorly applied documentation is not a ‘skilled’ SI.
An entity unable to secure a Principal but who procedures good clear well defined documentation is not a ‘skilled’ SI.
An entity who has not personally purchased the Doctrine and studied it applications over the longer term is not a ‘skilled’ SI.
A Sourcing Intermediary not prepared to take up the mantle of a controlling middle Buyer/ Seller and trades without the protection and guidance of a middle controlling trusted Buyer/ Seller should not be trading.
An informed Sourcing Intermediary is treated with respect by the middle Buyer/ Seller who, in turn, guides the Sourcing Intermediary as to the way in which a deal should be closed, but is not entitled to mentor the applicant in all matters of Procedures outside the transaction being enacted upon at any given time.
In where only one single SI is attached to a Principal, on either ‘side of the fence’ such is automatically conferred the position of PI and may remain in such a position at the discretion of the Principal once conferred by such.
Any Primary Intermediary (PI) may secure such a status no matter where such is placed in an Intermediary string as the Principal selects such at his discretion, based of skill and efforts already displayed. A Principal must not confer the PI status lightly.
A Sourcing Intermediary may confer with other like-minded peers in securing information about the honourable status of Principal they are intending to seek attachment with.
The Buyer/ Seller is well versed in Procedures and has chosen Intermediaries who are similarly well informed and able to verify the proficiency and good intent of the Buyer/ Seller and vice versa.
All informed URPIB Intermediaries shall trade using trademark Rules of delivery and banking as defined by the owners International Chamber of Commerce, (ICC) Paris, France as currently applicable publications as offered under latest ‘Incoterms’ or UCP Banking Rules at any given time.
An informed Sourcing Intermediary on the other hand, shall be treated as a specialist in the realm of practice, once such expertise has been demonstrated to an informed Buyer/ Seller, who shall, at their discretion, consider attachment of the Sourcing Intermediary to the Principal, in where, the Principal closes upon the transaction bought to bear by a Sourcing Intermediary with good and honourable intent and in-line with these Rules.
A Buyer/ Seller is not entitled to, or have obligation to guide or assist anyone, unless such is reasonably informed of basic Procedures as per said Doctrine to begin with.
A Buyer/ Seller shall not attempt to trade on his own once accepting information from another Intermediary or where appropriate with other trusted associated attached Sourcing Intermediaries who trust the Buyer/ Seller implicitly accordingly, any e-mail giving a positive reply to an inquiry of a SI implying or advising directly that an attachment is in place, shall ensure that good and honourable intention apply all times and that above all else that Principal shall ensure that the interests of the temporarily of fully attached Intermediary is protected at all times.
Accepting viable advice of a Sourcing Intermediary whether such is informed or not, is an acceptance of attachment for the nature of business in hand or yet to be formed.
URPIB Article 7
Electronic Irrevocable Payment Guarantee eIPG (Commissions)
A Principal of Agency may conduct business alone or may conduct business with those he or she is attached with , in doing so the principal shall agree to the following matter of protecting the interests of those attached.
Any e-mail giving advice or assistance provided to any Intermediary after first contact is made, in where, the Principal has indicate an interest to the inquiry being made, is prima facie evidence that a form of attachment and eIPG is force or the transaction that may eventuate from this interaction once valuable, worthy and viable information has been released to the Principal.
eIPG means electronic transmission by e-mail to imply to an Intermediary that payment guarantee of commission, once earned, is automatically conferred, now replaces hardcopy issuance of the standard IPG issuance application under these Rules.
Any e-mail giving advice as provided by or to a Sourcing Intermediary after first contact is made, in where, the Principal declares to indicate no interest in said inquiry, is a rejection of the inquiry and of ‘automatic attachment’ as it pertains to the relevant inquiry made at that time, even if valuable information is submitted after such a rejection has taken place. Silence of reply by a Principal to an SI making an e-mail inquiry is rejection of the inquiry.
A Sourcing Intermediary shall not disclose confidential information to an informed Buyer/ Seller unless attachment is first conferred or implied.
A positive reply to an e-mail, as provided by a Principal, infers temporary attachment is in place only for the inquiry in-hand and is considered a ‘test’ case.
Temporary attachment for that one inquiry leading to a transaction or not. In where, once a Principal moves forward on such an inquiry via advice made to indicate such as applied by any e-mail served confers all the obligations of the Principal to that SI as it would apply to any fully attached applicant.
A test case is an application initiated by a Principal to gauge if the Sourcing Intermediary has good trading skills.
On going e-mails for another inquiry to do with the potential of a looming transaction, confers attachment for each other transaction thereafter, if the initial testing of a new applicant, such a test has produced positive results.
Idle chatting in general matters is not considered an attachment.
The Sourcing Intermediary, once receiving a positive reply via e-mail from one Principal they have contacted by e-mail, shall ask the Principal for a ‘Transaction Code’.
The Principal shall provide a ‘Transaction Code’, to which such is attached to the information being surrendered by the SI, in where, attachment and protection of all matters of commission is instantly apparent until failure or success of the transaction has eventuated.
A ’Transaction Code’ bearing the e-mail address of the Principal is empirical evidence that attachment was conveyed and in place before any worthy or valuable information was surrendered. A Buyer/ Seller shall practice constraint in only accepting good information from any e-mail inquiries after considering such intently.
A Sourcing Intermediary seeking attachment with a Principal is considered a loyal, informed, skilled and honourable trader when enacting with such a Principal, and vice versa.
A loyal trader, is one that shall not, under any circumstances, discuss matters of business or advice personally given by his Principal to any other entity, including other Intermediaries in the same string Contract or other Principals, and shall ensure that while attachment is in force and when attachment is no longer in force, that all information given to the Sourcing Intermediary, by his Principal, is confidentially held at all times.
As attachment is conferred on good faith, such attachment equally can be revoked on good faith, and without reason, but not when any commission payment is due.
Said attachment cannot be revoked while a transaction is alive and in progress. An SI who is no longer attached to a Principal, who previously while attached, did provide valuable sourced information, which is later is used by a Principal, automatically attaches the SI to the Principal, in where, all interests of such are protected and secured by the Principal for the benefit of the SI.
The Principal using information or holding benefit of a SI no longer attached or, in where, after the deal has closed, and attachment was lost, must make all efforts over a long period of time to find such a SI and deliver such a benefit to such. A long period of time is defined as 6 months from the time such benefit was secured.
It is the obligation and responsibility of the SI to inform the Principal of contact change and change of address.
URPIB accepts the ideal behind the hardcopy IPG (Irrevocable Payment Guarantee) issuance protocol but does no longer endorses nor support the attributes of such and prefers the eIPG as the primary protocol.
Whether an IPG, in written hard copy form is in place or not, URPIB no longer supports the idea of these kind of pay orders, in any form, are a valid primary application in where such mostly conveys an untenable assurance that the interest of the intermediary is ‘guaranteed’ if a successful deal is closed due to ‘assistance’ given by a SI to Principal and that any written IPG which are issued do not guarantee that payment will follow is the standing assumption that the SI makes.
The promise ‘to pay’ commission is not a supporting premise to the ideal that once such commission is ‘earned’ such commission will be paid. The Intermediary looking to secure commission may only assume that commission is payable unconditionally if efforts made by such has led to the closing of an import-export transaction, producing a gross gain to the Principal.
A Buyer/ Seller must act in an honourable manner when using the services any entity providing valuable viable information which leads to the closing of a successful transaction, including securing commissions for all those who have assisted a Principal in closing upon a successful transaction, and payment of such within 7 (Seven) days of securing said commission(s) unconditionally and without recourse, as an internet e-mail application as defined herein.
A Buyer/ Seller is no longer required to issue a formally written IPG, in where, such eventuates, such is issued as per the FTN Exporting Doctrine as applied at the sole discretion of the issuer as a private Agreement. The said written past IPG protocol has support in part, in matters of the current eIPG protocol now being supported under these Rules.
Current URPIB eIPG protocol is designed to save time and effort in where ill informed Intermediaries not understanding the Doctrine and do not agree with such eIPG e-mail applications should not be seeking attachment of a informed URPIB endorsed Principal.
The relevant parts of the summary offered at the end of these rules also form part of these rules
URPIB Article 8
Mandated Entity: A person who holds special permission verifiable by written authority to act on behalf of a Principal and who has offered proof of claimed Mandate ship on request, to anyone transacting in a string Contract who is attached to such a Principal.
An official Mandated Agent obtains their own commission from their respective Principal, and has no part or share in Intermediaries’ protected commission.
A genuine Mandate holder does not ask for payment of goods with a transferable financial instrument and must be prepared to accept only a restricted financial instrument.
A person holding the position in a ‘string Contract’ next to the End Buyer or Supplier, is not a Mandate holder to that End Buyer or Supplier simply by virtue of the position he or she holds in the ‘string Contract’ or Intermediary chain, unless such holds written documentation which verifies his or her Mandate-ship, which in-turn, confirms his or her authority in being able to sell or buy goods on behalf of such said named disclosed Principal, offering goods they physically own or taking physical possession of goods they intend to buy.
A person who claims to be something that they are not is acting with bad or dishonourable intent and should be avoided at all times.
Intermediaries must never trade with a person claiming to be a Mandate holder who fails to disclose his or her verifiable principal.
Formal verification of the Mandate-ship must be provided when requested by any Intermediary, and in particular, when requested by the Primary Intermediary. Verbal confirmation and verifications are not acceptable.
Proof of the Mandate-ship must be supplied in writing and bear the name, address and contact telephone number of the Principal they represent.
A person claiming to be a Mandate holder and who refuses to verify his authority shall be treated as not being a Mandate holder.
Making claims of Mandate-ship, which later prove to be false, shall bear consequences in that; all Sourcing Intermediaries in a ‘string Contract’ may take a vote to cut the false Mandate holder out of the transaction, without risk of claim of circumvention by the Intermediary in question.
If it becomes apparent, after the identity of the Supplier or End Buyer has been revealed, that the claimed Mandate holder was not genuinely holding the Mandate-ship as claimed, then all Intermediaries in that group may vote to eject the false Mandate from the group/peers and continue with the transaction.
No option exists for a true Mandate holder to refrain from disclosing his Mandate-ship once he has made such a claim of authority.
Delegatus non Potest Delegare. A Mandated Intermediary cannot mandate another Intermediary to do his bidding/work.
URPIB recognises the position for the true Mandate holder, but declares that such a holder are not commonly found in string deals and that ‘due diligence’ on the matter must prevail before accepting any claim made by a declared Mandate holder.
A person, once a Mandated position is ascertained, is acting on behalf of a disclosed Principal Supplier or End Buyer and as such is treated as a Principal.
URPIB Article 9
A Principal ‘Buyer/ Seller’ needs only to declare his status on formal stationary / letterhead to show the intent of the trader’s position.
A ‘Buyer/ Seller’ is also an Intermediary but with many more obligations, liabilities and legal requirements placed upon him than those attached as Sourcing Intermediaries.
Informed Intermediaries are allowed to trade on behalf of a disclosed Principal or on behalf of an undisclosed Principal. The ‘undisclosed position’ is the most preferred position.
When an Intermediary acts on behalf of a ‘disclosed Principal’, then the Intermediary acting as the Buyer/Seller must disclose full name, address and contact information of the ‘disclosed Principal’ on his letterhead under his own title. This position although allowed is the least preferred trading position.
The Buyer/ Seller is allowed to act on behalf of a disclosed Principal or undisclosed Principal, assuming the Buyer/ Seller is in direct contact with the End Buyer or Supplier and not another Intermediary.
A Principal of Agency must at all times secure the assurance, for the supply goods from a disclosed verifiable supplier first , in the form of a valid written offers, before they attempt to sell such goods directly to a disclosed End Buyer. Without obtaining such a type of said offer no ‘Ostensible Authority’ exists to buy such goods therefore no ‘Ostensible Authority’ to sell such goods exists.
A Buyer/Seller not securing a written valid signed offer from a disclosed supplier has no goods to sell to any End Buyer.
A Buyer/seller clearly indication they are offering goods to an End Buyer in where no offer form a supplier is apparent is acting illegally , dishonourably and fraudulently.
A Buyer/Seller who makes an offer to sell goods via a string contract that have not been ascertained with the intent to source such goods after and end buyer has been sourced, is acting illegally , dishonourably and fraudulently.
The Buyer/ Seller must not disclose his End Buyer or Supplier in any transaction before any financial instrument is accepted.
The disclosure of any End Buyer or Supplier, to each other or to their competitors is not allowed under any circumstances prior to collection being successfully made or deposit being lodged, and may be disclosed after such events have become apparent if no mention has been made by a End Buyer or Supplier that such disclosures are not allowed after the transaction has closed.
If the closing of a deal is apparent, no party in the said the deal is allowed to disclose such dealings or parties to such a deal, to those not involved in such a deal, on the side on the deal apparent, and must ensure that all such matters remain strictly confidential at all times.
In every case, the Buyer/ Seller must not disclose the Principal on one side of the deal to the other side of the deal, as it related to a ‘string Contract’.
The Buyer/ Seller bears consequence for revealing another Principal, held in trust, which leads to circumvention of the Intermediaries in the group he is heading and protecting.
Any Intermediary attached to a Buyer/ Seller bears consequence for revealing another Principal or matters of the deal being enacted upon within a ‘string Contract’, which leads to circumvention of the Intermediaries in group he or she is a part of.
If it is later discovered that SI has disclosed information to another party, once such disclosure is given in trust of an informed Principal, the Principal has right not to pay any commissions to the dishonourable trader, should a transaction later close in where loss of the protective measures as offered under ‘sanctuary’ shall also prevail.
All information provided by a SI to a Principal Buyer/ Seller whether attached to such or not is implied to be given as an ‘assignment’.
URPIB Article 10
Right to Sell
The Principal will observe and be governed by the Laws of their domiciled Country, and/ or the Country from which they are trading, whichever is applicable.
Ignorance of the domestic Law is no defence and Sourcing Intermediaries.
An Intermediary who trades under the premise of ‘acting’ on behalf of an ‘undisclosed Principal’ (and where the truth and facts about a particular transaction have been hidden from a ‘Principal’) shall bear full consequences of his own doing, and cannot rely as a defence against legal action, that they are ‘ignorant of the Law’ as it pertains to Agency or the position from which he was attempting to trade
The Buyer/ Seller shall not intervene in, or take over, a transaction he was not involved in from the beginning.
If an Intermediary has acted in accordance with the instructions of his Principal prior to entering a legally binding situation. The Intermediary may also act on behalf of an ‘undisclosed Principal’ if allowed to do so under instruction of their ‘Principal’ then such in effect does so without risk of legal consequences.
This is the only status that the Intermediate Buyer/ Seller must achieve in order to offer and resell the secured goods before offering them to potential Buyers.
The right to resell occurs at the point when the Buyer/ Seller has a ‘Quotation’ from a Supplier. Securing the funds for the purchase is now considered the most important aspect of the transaction.
A Buyer/ Seller not heading the deal cannot be expected to, and is not obliged to, accept to trade, on a deal as started by others.
URPIB Article 11
In-House ‘OTS’ and ‘RFQ’ Applications
An ‘OTS’ is a FTN Exporting created in-house application and stands for “Offer to Sell.”
Such an application is specifically used when Sourcing Intermediaries are attached to a Principal.
An ‘Offer to Sell’ goods of a Supplier, as secured by a Sourcing Intermediary, only from a genuinely ascertained Supplier
The Supplier provides a proper ‘Offer’ to the Sourcing Intermediary, who in turn conducts ‘due diligence’ on the information, on the internet, and if all details seem valid and proper, in that a genuine Supplier is offering such goods, the SI fills in all details of such an ‘Offer’ onto an OTS form and follows through with information missing on the original ‘Offer’ made until all relevant details of the goods on ‘Offer’ are apparent on the OTS.
The OTS is then sent by the SI to his PI or his Principal.
As per URPIB Rules, an Intermediary that knowingly provides false information to a Principal, bears legal responsibilities and consequences of their actions- including presenting a false OTS or RFQ.
A ‘RFQ’ is a FTN Exporting created in-house application and stands for “Request for a Quote”.
Such an application is specifically used when Sourcing Intermediaries are attached to a Principal.
An ‘Offer to Buy’ goods or source goods, as asked for by an End Buyer, as secured by a Sourcing Intermediary, from only a genuinely ascertained End Buyer.
The End Buyer provides a proper ‘Offer to Procure’ to the Sourcing Intermediary, who in turn conducts ‘due diligence’ on the information, on the internet, and if all details seem valid and proper, in that a genuine End Buyer is seeking to buy said goods, the SI fills in all details of such a purchase query onto an RFQ form and follows through with information missing on the original ‘Offer’ made until all relevant details of the goods being sought is apparent on the RFQ.
The RFQ is then sent by the SI to his PI or Principal.
A OTS or RFQ form are in-house applications as used by a Buyer/ Seller, at their discretion, in a format as provided to their own Sourcing Intermediaries. A Sourcing Intermediary must not forward such forms to the End Buyer or Supplier to fill in and return.
A Supplier must provide an ‘Offer’. The Intermediary holds the original ‘Offer’ and fills in an ‘OTS’ and declares such, with all the required information sought on such. The OTS is then sent to the Principal they are attached to for further consideration. It is an ill informed and unprofessional act to ask a Supplier to fill in an OTS.
An End Buyer must ask for an ‘Offer’. The Intermediary holding the original request fills in an ‘RFQ’ form and declares such, with all the required information sought on such. The RFQ is then sent to the Principal they are attached to for further consideration. It is an ill informed and unprofessional act to ask an end buyer to fill in an RFQ.
A Principal conducting direct business with a Supplier, asks for a full ‘Offer’ and does not require a ‘OTS’, in where, such is a Sourcing Intermediary application when delivering valuable information to a PI or Buyer/ Seller heading a string deal.
A Principal conducting direct business with an End Buyer asks for a full ‘Purchase Offer’ and does not require a RFQ.
The RFQ and OTS application is an application which assists the Principal in being able to do his part in an informed manner. It’s also evidence of information held as secured by a SI and contributes as supporting evidence of the involvement of a SI to a particular transaction and directly reinforces the eIPG application. Such documents once provided to a Principal is also evidence of wrong doings, should the Principal later , fall foul of the law in where the OTS or RFQ will cause the blame to shift from the Principal to the SI who provided information which later proves to be false.
URPIB Article 12
Stepping back’ Procedures occur at the point at which the End Buyer, Buyer/ Seller and the Supplier, at any given time, will need to deal directly with each other. Both sides are independent of each other: one side of the deal does not become involved with the other side of the deal, as both sides of the deal start and end with the middle controlling Buyer/ Seller.
Stepping back’ Procedures is about the Principal being able to transact with another Principal quickly, when need be accordingly; as it applies to an attached or unattached Intermediary, disclosure of the Principal must be apparent at the start of the transaction before ‘Offers’ are examined or issued.
A Principal of Agency, acting as a Buyer/ Seller in a ‘string contract’, is not obligated to consider any other protocol or any other precondition prior to accepting a RFQ or OTS, which must have, amongst other things; the Supplier or End Buyer fully disclosed on such.
The Buyer/ Seller controlling the transaction is obligated to protect, secure and pay all Intermediaries involved in any particular transaction on both sides of a pending deal, once the business has been successfully concluded. If a Buyer/ Seller is claiming to hold the middle controlling position, he his services to protect the commission of Intermediaries involved on both sides of the transaction is automatically conferred once a properly formatted OTS or RFQ is advised.
To appease the ‘stepping back’ process in matters of circumvention, as to show good intent in that the Principal is prepared to ‘support ‘ the SI on the disclosed transaction being attempted upon, said Buyer/ Seller must allow the named entity offering a valid OTS or RFQ to take on the role of a Primary Intermediary when attached to the Principal, in where, all documents pertaining to the deal in hand travels to the End Buyer or Supplier via the named Primary Intermediary and vice versa, back to the Buyer/ Seller until failure or success of the deal is recorded.
The PI as right to witness and participate in the event of the transaction, once a valid OTS or RFQ has been surrendered. No name of the SI is allowed to appear on the actual Contract once released, but such may still be privy to and enable such a Contract to be passed to the End Buyer or Supplier, and vice versa, as a representative of the Principal.
URPIB Article 13
Chain of Command
The Buyer/ Seller is the controlling entity of the whole Intermediary Group. All declared Agents of the Principal have the next associated status. The Primary Intermediary (PI), the immediate associate next to the Buyer/ Seller is second in command. The (PI) adjacent to the End Buyer is next in line, and then finally there are the Sourcing Intermediaries who do not have any defined role in the actual closure of the trade.
A Buyer/ Seller is a primary Principal with special skills and capabilities that enable him to be able to close a complex import-export transaction.
All other Intermediaries assisting the Buyer/ Seller are ‘Sourcing Intermediaries’ (SI), except for declared associated Agents of the Principal, while such association is apparent.
If no honourable trusted informed URPIB Buyer/ Seller is evident in the ‘string Contract’, then all the other Intermediaries cannot, and should not, expect to close a deal and earn the commissions implied therein. Any attempts to do so means that there is a strong threat of circumvention should such a transaction occur without the use of the said Buyer/ Seller.
The first major step in the formation of an Intermediary ‘string Contract’, is when, the Buyer/ Seller communicates with his immediate PI on either side of the deal. The PI informs all Sourcing Intermediaries (SI) as to the Procedure required for ‘stepping back’. The PI secures details of all the commissions that are to be paid and then the Intermediaries ‘step back’ to expose the Primary Intermediary next to the end Principal.
The Buyer/ Seller must obtain the clear path with assistance of a PI from both sides of the deal, if necessary. If this is not possible the Buyer/ Seller shall refrain from continuing with the trade in question.
The Buyer/ Seller must obtain the controlling position with honest and honourable intent, and without deceit or misleading statements, or no deal is said to be possible.
A person holding a position as a Sourcing Intermediary in a ‘string contract’ is unable to earn commission without the presence of a trusted and informed URPIB Buyer/ Seller in the deal. If faced with this scenario, the nominated middle Buyer/ Seller, if secured, can only attempt to use the virtues of the IPG to get all parties on both sides to expose their Principals. This must only be attempted if there is cogent evidence that the end Principals exist.
All Intermediaries, in particular Sourcing Intermediaries, learning the business and who are not confident enough to take the position of Buyer/ Seller, must either seek to attach themselves to, or secure the services of, another Intermediary who is a trusted and highly competent person able to transact in the position as a URPIB informed ‘Buyer/ Seller’.
A Buyer/ Seller who receives information via Sourcing Intermediaries is then obligated to protect all Intermediaries’ interests in the transaction being attempted at all times regardless of whether an IPG is in force or not.
URPIB Article 14
Commission Payment Matters
Payment of commission is derived form the the price offered of goods being sold in a string deal based. The Principal earns his gains from the action of buying goods from a supplier as ‘buyers’ at one price to which such sells such goods as ‘seller’ at another price to an end buyer.
Matter of commission payments and rates are very private confidential matters.
No commission payment earned is allowed to be openly disclosed online on any web site , or to any person in any form whatsoever , including those in the same trading group from which the commission was derived from, for a period of 5 years after earned,unless the principal allows such disclosure to prevail in writing.
A Buyer/ Seller is not obligated to disclose the full purchase price of goods offered, in where the full actual gain applied on the transaction becomes apparent when trading alone or with other who are assisting the principal.
The Principal may declare a whole commission offered to any given side, to a PI or such may offer a personal individual commission rate to any intermediary assisting such when no PI is apparent.
Once PI is apparent or declared then such a PI is given one single commission rate, from which the PI obtains his own commission from and in where others attached to the PI is allocated a share as well.
A PI shall be entitled to keep the biggest share of any commission offered and allocate a share from such a rate, to those attached – as he sees fit.
As he sees fit , depending upon premise of “ who assists the most shall be entitled to a better share rate to those who assist the least ”.
The rate being protected is the ‘offered rate’ and may not actually define or reflect the actual gain being sought or actually secured by the Principal. The ‘offered’ commission rate once given as per the the issuance of an IPG or implied in a eIPG application, is the minimum rate being assured.
The minimum rate assured to each SI by the PI is the guaranteed rate of payment. The whole amount assured to the PI, is allowed a tolerance factor of -/+ 10 percent. The PI guarantees on behalf of his principal only the minimum rate he has assured to others.
The PI shall ensure to allow the the tolerance factor to the whole rate given to such, when the PI allocates a portion of the whole rate to each sourcing intermediary assisting the PI.
The PI guarantees the minimum assured rate before accepting the submission of information.
All rates are paid once the transaction and said delivery has successfully closed , with in 7 days of such. The minimum rate offer is the rate paid once only on a single successful delivery or when a revolving transaction is apparent as per each successful delivery.
From this offered rate as securing his share, the PI allots ‘as he sees fit’, a fair commission rate payable to each SI depending upon the contribution and efforts made by such enacting in the ‘string Contract’.
Gross profits portion applied to the unit price may also be described as an ‘Operational Expense’ (OPX).
The portion allotted as commission is allotted as ‘gross’, in where, payment is made ‘net’ less all bank charges and fee’s when payment is initiated.
No change of banking details, names or e-mail address is allowed, once submitted, for matter of commission payments.
These Rules are wholly supportive for non-break cargo shipments in the first instance, and FCL in the second instance.
As it applies to a PI working both ‘sides of the fence’, so shall it apply to any SI found on both ‘side of the fence’ in relation to commission payments in where a PI once being identified as being apparent on both side of the fence such shall be given a larger appropriate commission whole share.
There is no breach of conditions related to disclosures ‘from one trading side to another’ when a small group, or single person, on one side of the deal, producing a Supplier is the same group, or person, attached with a Principal who also secures the End Buyer.
Matters of final commission ‘pay out’ rate, are discussed with the Primary Intermediary on any given side and the SI attached to such, and agreed upon before any such ‘pay out’ rate advice is delivered to the Principal.
The Principal will only allot ‘pay out’ rates as specified by the Primary Intermediary on any given side.
The Principal is formally obligated to physically pay such rate to each nominated SI when commission becomes payable as directed by his PI or as offered to each member by the Principal.
In all cases, in where a transaction closes, the attached PI is paid first, the attached Sourcing Intermediaries come second in order of the ‘string Contract’ application.
The Principal at pay out time shall advise a Pro forma invoice to each named person, and pass such to the PI , who shall distribute such individually to each person being assured commission by e-mail.
The the entity receiving the Pro forma invoice , shall sign such as accepted and return a copy to the PI , who shall pass such to the Principal as received.
No payment will be made once due , unless the Pro forma invoice is signed and declared carrying proper information of the entity accepting payment.
All payment made directly by SWIFT only to the named bank account appearing on the Pro forma invoice as a matter of formal record.
A Pro-forma invoice one issued no bearing the same information as secured at the start of he transaction shall not be paid. No changes on a Pro forma invoice will be entertained.
Those who are assisting a PI may accept the commission minimum rate or may reject the minimum rate offered. A rejection of a rate may produce a counter rate or may cancel the whole transaction, in where the decision of the principal once made, is firm and final.
URPIB Article 15
Commission – E-mail Serviced Irrevocable Payments Guarantee
eIPG Protection mechanisms means e-mail applied irrevocable ‘Payment Guarantee’ application.
All matters of a written IPG may sill apply by those wishing to use such in accordance with the FTN Exporting Trading Doctrine, in where such is now considered to be a ‘private contracting arrangement’. Relevant matters defined herein pertaining to the use of ‘eIPG’ may also apply to some parts of a formally written IPG.
A Buyer/ Seller is only obligated to abide by matters of ‘eIPG’, as defined herein, if they chose to instigate a eIPG status using only e-mail applications, when such a Principal decides to use the services of temporarily or fully attached Intermediary(ies) to assist said Principal.
This is the current 2012 preferred eIPG issuance application. All persons providing information to a URPIB Buyer/ Seller in an active ‘string Contract’, leading the closing of a deal, are entitled to commission whether a pay order is in place or not, once an active deal has closed.
The Principal may ask to test the information first before considering advising an eIPG, in where disclosure of information does not included disclosure of any Principal.
Should a Principal advise, by e-mail, that the information advised is accepted, or imply in any positive matter, as to have accepted the information provided, the Principal shall estimate a personal commission rate in-line with the rate applicable to normally attached Sourcing Intermediaries, as indicated in these Rules, once all Intermediaries in a ‘string Contract’ have been advised.
If Product is yet to be assured, in where, price is not ascertained immediately, then the Principal shall imply that he minimum commission rate application will apply.
If an Agent or PI is used by the Principal, then the Principal shall only confer with his Agent or PI, in all matters of a potential deal, including matter of commission rates and payments, in where, such a PI then advises and instructs all those attached to the PI.
Once a eIPG status is apparent, full disclosure of the Principal must be surrendered within 24 hours of an eIPG being in force. The Primary Intermediary must collect the relevant personal details of each person seeking commission and provide such to the Buyer/ Seller once such is asked for, but may indicate the number of SI involved in the deal when a OTS or RFQ is advised.
No ‘Post Office Box’ addresses are allowed. Current banking information must be supplied for inclusion on each individual payment that will need to eventuate, once a transaction successfully closes.
It is contrary to the rules and illegal to claim other forms of commission in the same transaction from any other source.
If any such fraudulent activities are discovered, the Seller will advise his bank not to honour the commission ‘pay order’ due to this person.
The Souring Intermediary may accept or decline such a commission rate offer. The surrendering of valuable information indicates that the rate has been accepted, and indicated that the Principal is prepared to personally pay commission once earned as stated.
URPIB Article 16
Acceptable Products and Services – All URPIB Intermediaries
An Intermediary shall not trade in, or attempt to trade with, the following Products or entities who ply such:
PBG otherwise known as financial instruments; ‘Prime Bank Guarantees’. This includes Bank Warrants, Pension Funds, Medium Term Notes (MTN) and the likes.
Any form of gold bullion (or other precious metals) held in electronic depository form. Physical trading in gold, in any form, is allowed where no ‘Certificate’ is apparent on such gold – this is also defined as ‘deep storage gold’, alluvial gold or dust. DSG must be refined at Buyer’s cost to obtain formal Certification. Very experienced traders should attempt these trades.
Any form of diamonds or precious stones held in electronic depository form is not permitted. Physical trading in any precious stones is allowed, with the exception of ‘conflict diamonds’; diamonds obtained by the exploitation of children or which provide appalling pay and condition for its workers. In general, only very experienced traders should attempt such a trade.
Any weapons or material, whether raw or processed, used to make weapons or devices of mass destruction. Legally acquired military equipment and such associated material are allowed. Very experienced traders should attempt such a trade.
Any biological material that could be misused to the detriment of humans. (Medical equipment and medicines allowed.)
Any Government, Race or Country that has a definite ‘ill will’ against the United States of America (i.e.: Embargo applied by the USA) or allied Countries, considered to be allies or in amicable association with the USA. Intermediaries may trade with Countries which have demonstrated past ‘ill will’ towards the USA, but which now are making efforts to unite or reunite diplomatically with the USA.
A felon, or person, who has been tried under Westminster or Democratic type of judicial system, incarcerated in a prison for any reason involving with matters of theft, arson, fraud or deception.
The Intermediary should not trade, resell, nor be in possession of any trade secrets, copyright material or matters considered secretive by nature.
Intermediaries shall not practice any business that suggests money laundering or any associated criminal activity, such as the trafficking of people or prohibited substances.
Any transaction in which the parties are not transacting in the same language.
Any primary crude oil transaction (or fuels in general). Secondary crude oil transactions are allowed. A primary Contract is defined to be one where a ‘precondition of sale’ requires the disclosure of a Refinery Processing Agreement or similar.
An undischarged bankrupt entity may only trade in the position of a Sourcing Intermediary while attached and may not trade in the position of a primary Principal defined as a Buyer/ Seller.
A person of diminished mental capacity, or a person who cannot comprehend the language of a deal they are entering into. A person under 18 years of age.
The following commodities and quantities are best avoided: Non-ferrous scrap metal, Beef Products, Quarantine Products, Fumigated Food Products, Lose clothing. Single or Multi FCL loads.
Any other commodity traders who ask for T/T, SWIFT type of payments or PBG payments or an active or inactive SLC up front are to be avoided. Likewise trading in such instruments are not allowed-
Any Producer, Supplier entity, in any Country, in where such has been noted for human rights violations are avoided. Any Country, in where a violent civil dispute has broken out.
An Intermediary shall not be involved with any exporter or importer of live animals, in where cruel handling or processing methods are apparent.
An Intermediary must, at all times, ensure that the Product they are dealing with is indeed merchantable, appropriate and readily sourced from reputable Suppliers. Furthermore, the Intermediary must have made reasonable effort to ascertain, by whatever means, that the Product they are dealing with is safe, legal and genuine, and is generally acceptable as a tradable Product world-wide.
Shall not trade on ‘Offers’ and ‘Contracts’ where UN sanctions are in force, unless permission is sought of the UN in writing.
Dishonourable or ill informed traders, and ‘Offers’ they ply in contrary to the Doctrine and these Rules, must not be entertained.
All matters of shipping ‘charter party’ Contracts. Intermediaries transact on CFR or CIF transaction, in where matters of shipping is tenured by the Supplier.
All matters of a transaction where trading terms in part, or fully, are apparent such as LOI, BCL, ICPO, POP, ASWP, T/T, MPA, NCNDA, BG, SLC, MOU, EXW, DDP, DAP.
URPIB Intermediaries may only trade in CIP, FCA, CIF, CFR, FAS, FOB, CPT
A Buyer/ Seller may not disclose details of a Supplier to an End Buyer, or vice versa, if such are trading ‘on behalf of a disclosed Principal”.
A Principal must never trade, when offering goods for sale, without first having secured a good valid ‘Offer’ or ‘Quote’ from a genuinely ascertained Supplier in possession of goods.
URPIB Article 17
An Intermediary shall not transact in bad faith or in a dishonourable manner.
Any Intermediary who circumvents others, or produces ‘Offers’ without ‘ostensible authority’, shall be deemed to be a ‘dishonourable trader’, and shall not be allowed to trade within a ‘string Contract’. Once the infringing party or person has been clearly identified as having transacted in a manner that is defined at being in bad faith, this person shall be blacklisted on the URPIB Registry for life.
‘Dishonourable acts’ are defined as, among other things, wilfully deceiving an End Buyer, Supplier or any other Intermediary in the course of a transaction, with the intention of causing or furthering the successful closure such a transaction. An Intermediary who falsely represent that they have a ‘Principal’ in relation to a transaction is acting dishonourably.
A Sourcing Intermediary acting in contrary to the directives of his Principal is acting dishonourably.
URPIB Article 18
Intermediary and Goods
An URPIB endorsed Intermediary, officially trading under the Doctrine, includes support of proper application of UCP Banking Rules, Incoterms Delivery Rules and English Common Law of Contract Formation or part there of.
The URPIB Intermediary shall, at all times, trade in ‘documents’ and not the physical goods pertaining to such documents.
Only statutory or Federal Laws in the exporter’s Country are capable of overriding these Rules and Laws.
URPIB Article 19
Other than that, which has been already advised, regarding the ‘Performance Guarantee’, under no circumstances shall a SLC supported ‘Performance Guarantee’ be opened, as active or inactive, in any form whatsoever to favour an End Buyer before the financial instrument pertaining to the Product being purchased has been lodged and accepted into the account of the ‘Buyer/ Seller’ associated and controlling the deal in hand.
Intermediaries shall not transact on any deals in which the transaction calls for the ‘Performance Guarantee’ to be lodged prior to the lodgement of an active financial instrument.
The term ‘Performance Bond’ is not an inappropriate term of reference for use by URPIB Intermediaries. URPIB Intermediaries shall use the term ‘Performance Guarantee’ (PG).
The Intermediary shall offer a LDD (Late Delivery Discount) on invoice, as a deduction from the own envisaged gain, when no P.G. is available as secured from a Supplier.
Even where a P.G. is offered by a Supplier, the Buyer/ Seller is not obligated to provide such for the benefit of the End Buyer and many still, at their discretion, offer the LDD application.
The value of any LDD or P.G. shall not exceed 2.5% of any portion of gross gains envisaged.
The LDD may be described as a percentage rate, or as a dollar rate, per Metric ton.
URPIB Article 20
As far as the Intermediary is concerned, no transaction shall be allowed to proceed where a ‘shipment date’ is more than 20 (Twenty) days after the issue of the ‘Bill of Lading’ as per its issuance date, of the 21 (Twenty One) days allowed for presenting such, before a BOL is said to be ‘stale’.
A ‘Bill of Lading’ for all FOB transactions, shall mean a ‘received’ bill, where the Intermediary is asked to ‘assist’ the End Buyer in obtaining the ‘Bill of Lading’. Liner Waybills are not accepted.
All transactions involving a CIF deal shall require a ‘shipped’ bill. In all such transactions, the ‘shipment date’ shall mean the date when the ‘Bill of Lading’ is issued.
First delivery date, of less than 45 days from the ‘Offer’ issuance, is not accepted unless the Supplier has Products on ‘Offer’ for immediate shipment and, in where; the Country of the End Buyer is able to reach the Supplier’s Port within 20 (Twenty) days of ‘chartering’ a ship.
In such a case, if the Supplier offers a “1st Delivery Date” under 35 days, the Intermediary shall apply that 35 days is the ”First Delivery Date” or more, but not less.
All transactions are ‘Future Delivery Contracts’. No ocean going ‘Spot Transactions’ are allowed.
URPIB Article 21
Matter of Documentary Credits
Types of allowable and acceptable credits as used by an Intermediary.
As far as the Intermediary is concerned, a current version of a UCP formatted Irrevocable, Transferable, Confirmed Documentary Letter of Credit, whether pre-advised or active, is the first preferred acceptable instrument that an Intermediary Buyer/ Seller should strive to secure.
The said confirmation as made by the bank of the Buyer/ Seller at issuer’s expense.
A ‘soft confirmation’ is allowed as made by the bank of the Buyer/ Seller at issuer’s expense.
An Intermediary shall not transact on any deal where SWIFT or other methods apply for payment of goods.
A ‘Supplier’ purporting to ‘Offer’ goods shall not be considered a genuine ‘Supplier’, if they request payment in the form of a ‘Transferable Letter of Credit’.
The Buyer/ Seller shall allow the transferable instrument to be transferred only to a Supplier’s account, as a ‘non transferable instrument.’
‘Back to Back’ Letter of Credit Procedures are not allowed to be used by Intermediaries under URPIB Rules of Trade.
A transferable credit may only be transferred once. It’s issuance is transferable, as held by the Buyer/ Seller, in where once transferred, the said credit can no longer be transferred again.
The End Buyer issues the credit to the Buyer/ Seller (which may be transferred once) as ‘non transferable’ directly to the ‘Owner’ in possession of the goods and not to another ‘Seller’.
In accordance with UCP, ‘Post Office Box’ addresses can no longer be cited on a credit. Furthermore, the term ‘transferable’ must now be applied to the credit accordingly, as advised from an End Buyer or his bank, to the Buyer/ Seller or his bank.
The credit must be issued from a ‘Top 100 Ranked’ safe world class safe bank, (otherwise the credit must be advised as confirmed) to the account of the Buyer/ Seller as the second preferred application.
A confirmed credit allows the Buyer/ Seller to ‘localise’ the credit. This means that the ‘advising bank’ is not dependent on the ‘issuing bank’s’ instructions, and allows collection upon examining the documents required for delivery presentation. All expenses of adding confirmation to the credit shall be for the account of the End Buyer.
In-house credits, or any other credit, may not be used until great trading experience over years is gained by the URPIB trader. Only a confirmed credit may back the issuance of an in-house credit.
All transferable credit ‘transfer fees’ is paid by as ‘agreed by’ the End Buyer, when transfer is initiated, as per the request of the ‘advising bank’ as made applicable to the DLC ‘issuing bank’.
The End Buyer obtains an ‘Offer’. The ‘Offer’ must stipulate to imply, in agreement, that all ‘transfer fees’ are for the account of the End Buyer. Failing to mention such, applies the full meaning of UCP 600 Rules, in that, the Buyer/ Seller shall be required to pay for the ‘transfer fee’ before the bank is obligated the transfer the ‘buy prices’ value of goods to the Supplier, with the issuance of a ‘bank endorsed’ DLC to such.
URPIB Article 22
Terms and Trading Conditions
Where a ‘precondition’ to a transaction is the supply of a Bank Comfort Letter (BCL) or similar, whether associated with the issue of an ICPO or LOI or not, shall not be entertained under any circumstances by a URPIB trader.
The Doctrine, as owned by FTN Exporting, shall not be used in part with other Procedures not supported by the FTN Doctrine.
Under URPIB, a ‘Quotation’ and / or ‘Offer’ and ‘Contract’ must prevail to establish grounds under Contract Law, which defines inter alia, acceptance, legal capacity and consideration.
English Law and ability to govern in foreign applications, is ostensibly the leading jurisdiction in international trade. Intermediaries using URPIB shall apply English Law and foreign governance, of such, to reinforce and favour their own trading activities.
All International airline pilots and ship masters are required to speak English fluently; accordingly the international Language of use by an Intermediary applying Contract is the English Language.
Local Laws and Customs are for local uses and shall not be used in extraterritorial dealings.
In settling of disputes, the universal application of LCIA (London Commission of International Arbitration) process is the preferred application. In all cases the Intermediary, acting as Seller to the End Buyer, may select his Country and methods used to settle disputes.
The Supplier to the Buyer, come Seller, may choose a jurisdiction and method of arbitration to which the Buyer must accept.
A dispute between an End Buyer and Buyer/ Seller may not mean to imply that such a dispute is with the Buyer/ Seller as well as his Supplier; and vice versa. Accordingly, the entity holding supply may dictate Contract ‘Terms and Conditions’ as well as method of arbitration.
URPIB Article 23
Corporate Business Forms and Documents
All forms, documents, Contracts, in house applications are copyright applications whether such are beta form, examples or when apparent in a live deal, are owned by FTN Exporting. Such documents are offered for personal use by those who have legally purchased the FTNX Doctrine from a legitimate publisher or as per a copy sanctioned by FTN Exporting on their web site.
Any Intermediary caught using a pirated copy of such documents by a Principal (or publication), in where a transaction leads to closure of a live deal, commission shall not be forthcoming to such an individual if upon, a suspect Intermediary is tested, in where such is unable to prove they are legitimately using such documents (or publication). As it applies to a intermediary, it applies much more so to a Principal doing the same, once such a suspect Principal is professing that they are protecting commission, which they are not authorised to do.
An SI unsure of the status of a legitimate URPIB or Doctrine informed Buyer/ Seller may ask the Buyer/ Seller from where they have purchased their publication from, in where the SI may verify such to the claimed Seller of such.
A SI is hereby warned, that a suspect Buyer/ Seller who has illegally obtained a copy of the works, is the type of Buyer/ Seller that will also have no compunction to circumvent those attached to such, is the immediate assumption made.
Intermediaries using URPIB shall not accept nor apply Procedures and terms in a trading environment, terms such as LOI, BCL, MOU, ASWP, NCNDA, MPA, ICPO, RWA, FFIDLC, PB, Divisible, POP and shall not use a SLC to pay for goods.
The use of these acronyms automatically invalidates the protection and trading support offered under URPIB.
Any use of an appropriate acronym must be fully defined, at least once, in any document produced by the professional trader.
All documents produced by a Buyer/ Seller shall be professionally applied, well written, carrying clarity.
Fragmented, sanitised and outdated documents must not be relied upon by the Buyer/ Seller.
Under no circumstances shall URPIB Rules be used to apply midway in a transaction after it has commenced using other flawed applications.
All forms, documents and formal direction/ advice offered by a Principal, in any trading situation, may not be changed or altered once issued, as to cause a rejection of such document, advice or directions.
An Intermediary may not use the name of a Principal unless they are fully attached to such or as directed by such. A SI using the name of a Principal in one transaction, may not assume that such may apply for all other subsequent transactions.
A Principal does not need to enact on the virtues of a RFQ or OTS application. Such in-house application are use when a Principal is enacting with Sourcing Intermediaries.
A SI must secure an ‘Offer’ from a Supplier, make all attempts to obtain all other required information missing on the ‘Offer’, in where the SI transfers all viable information onto their own properly formatted template defined as a OTS (Offer to Sell) and submit such to their attached Principal for further action or consideration. This is the main duty of an attached SI on the supply side.
An attached SI may service a ‘Letter of Introduction’ defined as an ‘ITB’ to a Supplier any time in general form, of specific to Products they are seeking to be assured, in their own name in the first instance any time, or on behalf of a Principal in the second instance if permission is given to do so, as per the copy used at any given time.
An unattached but informed SI looking to practice on the Buyer/ Seller protocol may service a ‘Letter of Introduction’ defined as an ‘ITB’ to a Supplier any time in general form, or specific to Products they are seeking to be assured, in their own name as ‘Buyer’ in ‘consideration’ of such purchase, so long as they are able to service the inquiry further or have, are attached to Buyer/ Seller who will accept to examine an OTS on their behalf for enacting upon further. As it applies to the OTS so such may apply when using a RFQ when securing a End Buyer for a Buyer/ Seller.
The term ‘consideration’ as specified under these Rules means that the SI is only asking for an ‘Offer’ from a Supplier so such may think about buying such goods.
The ITB contains bone fides of the SI, and claims made of abilities and skill, it can bring to a transaction, in assisting the Supplier to secure added sales. The SI when making the letter may mention only that they adhere to FTN Exporting URPIB Rules of Doctrine of Trade.
A SI may service an inquiry from an End Buyer, make all attempts to obtain all other required information missing as the inquiry made, in where the SI transfers all viable information onto their own properly formatted template defined as a RFQ (Request for Quote) and submit such to their attached Principal for further action or consideration. This is the main duty of an attached SI on the End Buyer’s side.
A RFQ or OTS form is not allowed to be given to a Principal to fill in and return to the Intermediary, so such can present the said form to an attached Principal.
Under no circumstance shall an Intermediary be called to head a deal once a deal has commenced at ‘Quotation’ or ‘Offer’ issuance stage.
All transactions commence with adherence to URPIB Rules and end accordingly.
Acceptable variations or variables applied to the Doctrine when used by a URPIB trader, such must be able to be applied without conflict to URPIB Rules.
URPIB Article 24
Contract versus Financial Instrument.
No party to a trade is permitted to present the Contract of Sale to a financial institution as a precondition of doing business, unless the financial institution is the End Buyer to goods being offered. Banks deal in finance and not Contracts.
loan needed to open a DLC is an obligation of the lender to the banker. Once opened the bank effects its guarantee to the Seller.
Under URPIB, an Intermediary shall treat the financial instrument, the Sales Contract, and the insurance Contract as all being individual independent documents.
No bank issued guarantees are allowed to be accepted by an Intermediary. Intermediaries shall no transact on the virtues of a Bill of Exchange.
Cash payment may not be asked for or used to by goods.
Deposits may be demanded of an End Buyer, by a standing Buyer/ Seller, if after 2 (Two) ‘Offers’ have been rejected and a third ‘Offer’ is demanded. This kind of deposit shall represent not more then 5 % of the Contract or shipment value and is defined as deposit and Buyer’s Performance Guarantee.
Once an ‘Offer’ with added terms related to said deposit is applied on such and accepted as legally binding, the actual deposit is lodged to the account of ‘Seller’ prior to Contract issuance.
In return of the deposit, PPI Certificate is surrendered with the issuance of the Contract.
Should payment method, as well as terms and conditions on the ‘Offer’, as applied on the Contract are challenged or not accepted by the End Buyer, is where the actual financial instrument for payment of goods fail to be lodged on time, the Seller is allowed to claim the deposit as an End Buyer ‘failure to perform’ penalty and breach of ‘Offer’ and agreement applied on such.
URPIB Article 25
UCP: Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits.
Unless permitted by any URPIB updates, an Intermediary is not allowed to issue an ‘Offer’ or ‘Contract’ that refers to or relies upon any other provisions or protocol pertaining to the issuance of a financial instrument other than those which are endorsed under current UCP ( Uniform Custom and Practice for Documentary Credits ) Rules. This includes all financial Instruments issued as an “In-house” DLC and endorsed as such.
URPIB Article 26
DLC Transfer Fees/ DLC Confirmation Fees
Article of UCP, unless changes in the future, applies where both parties have contractually agreed upon; that the transfer fee is made for the account of the End Buyer in and unconditional application in the first instance, confirmation of a credit is made by the End Buyer to the Seller’s bank. In the second instance to a free bank at it counters, in the Country of the Seller. If a Supplier requires a credit from the Seller to be advised as confirmed, the Supplier shall initiate process to confirm the credit to the Seller’s bank at his expense.
URPIB Article 27
Any Intermediary approaching any Buyer/ Seller who has declared to also be a URPIB trader, infers explicitly that the Buyer/ Seller shall automatically protect the interests of anyone approaching them in any manner, with information, and that should such information prove positive, the Buyer/ Seller shall collect and protect commission for each said protected entity unconditionally.
The Buyer/ Seller is not allowed to use the information given, in where a deal has collapsed, in where later should the Buyer/ Seller decide to use such vital information as provided by the Intermediary in the past on another deal yet to apply in the future, such must first notify the said Intermediary who originally gave such vital information, before the approach is made.
If the Intermediary cannot be contacted after various attempts, the Principal may use such information, in where commission portion is still secured and held on his behalf for claiming within one year.
The said Intermediary, once notified (whether he or she is involved in the deal or not being attempted at that time), shall expect unconditionally that the Buyer/ Seller will apply to include the said Intermediary in the commission payment structure. Vital information specifically defines in where information about Supplier and or End Buyer are provided regardless if a ‘IPG’ is in place or not.
It is a dishonourable act to trade as a Buyer/ Seller and any URPIB trader, in where others have trusted the Buyer/ Seller in providing such with valuable information that could be used to close upon a transaction, in where the Buyer/ Seller uses such information on other future deals without involving the original person providing to disclose such original information.
Any Intermediary defines to mean anyone trading in commodities whether or not such is informed about URPIB.
“Sanctuary” is an applied mechanism that allows one party to disclose up front vital information in a quick manner for purpose of evaluation without having the deal stall due to matters involved in issuing the ‘IPG’ in hardcopy, in where virtues of ‘eIPG’ now may apply.
URPIB Article 28
Connecting Commission Payments
In where an Intermediary or group being protected by the Buyer/ Seller has provided information to such in the course of a transaction or otherwise, which leads to the discovery of other Principal(s) by default, then the original Intermediary group shall be entitled to the payment of commission unconditionally, should the Buyer/ Seller later contact (or vice versa) such a Principal, person or party in where a transaction is closed.
The Buyer/ Seller is fully obligated to contact all person associated in the original party, and pay to each individual, a negotiable or offered commission payment as defined in these rules.
URPIB Article 29
In-House DLC Use
An ‘in-house DLC’ is a financial instrument produced by the Intermediary from their own stationary and forwarded to the bank of the Supplier or exporter for acceptance, in where authentication occurs contrary to normal practices as per a reverse protocol.
The term ‘Bank issued’ financial instrument must not be apparent on the ‘Offer’ or ‘Contract’ made by a Supplier which allows the use of the ‘in-house DLC’ issuance, in where such carries on its form that the ‘in-house DLC’ abides by UCP 600 issuance Rules.
Only very experienced Intermediaries may use the virtues if an ‘in-house DLC’, as the use of such is a new development in banking practices from 2007, which still widely unknown and not a familiar application to many bankers around the world for years to come.
To use an ‘in-house Letter of Credit’, the Buyer/ Seller must have in their account, a confirmed accepted credit as confirmed by their bank.
Failure to accept a correctly formatted ‘in-house DLC’, is a breach of Contract as applicable from the perspective of the Supplier, if ‘Offer’ and ‘Contract’ made no asking for a bank issued financial instrument. Silence of this matter, favour the DLC issuance of the Buyer.
Intermediaries must ask for a ‘bank issued financial instrument’ when dealing with End Buyers.
*Copyright : ©URPIB/URITI: 2001 FTN Exporting 2012
*©UCP and Incoterms are a Trade mark of the ICC Paris France.
In Summary:URPIB 2013
Date 1st August 2012
LME, LIFFE , RSA or even where a game of football as apparent world wide all have their own rules of Association. Rules are not laws. The nature of ‘business’ is dictated by laws, the nature of association is dictated by rules. When a rule becomes ‘superior’ it to can become law or be supported by the law as in by-laws. Rules and laws may in fact describe ‘unlawful’ acts and intent. Laws on the other hand address issues pertaining to illegal and wilful acts. All laws are rules but not all rules are laws. Legally empowered entities can issue ‘fines’ as supported under the law. Breaking of rules on the other hand often imposes a penalty or consequence. It is an unlawful act to issues ‘fines’ by an entity not empowered under the law to do so. etc..
This is not a ‘commission business’ as defined under local solicitation laws applied in many countries around the world , to stop ‘door knockers’ trying to induce sales at the home of people in where very hard sell efforts are applied which produces a deal in turn which earns the ‘door knocker’ or call centre, a commission.In fact, the Buyer/Seller earns a gain or gross profit no a commission.The Buyer /Seller from this gross profits , pays out a commission as net to those who assisted the principal in securing a deal only, once such a deal is closed. Such a deal often taking many month of negotiation to conclude.
In any business application where commission is the form of remuneration , much more so in international trade than any other activity, a principal must pay commission once earned. The term ‘must pay’ or ‘shall pay’ is not the same as ‘will pay’. There is no paymaster application nor company trust fund or escrow account application in play when payment of commission is due, as such applications are applied for money ascertained, in where commission is a promise to pay money to individuals once such money is earned. All intermediaries assisting a principal in bringing a deal to close is entitled to a payment of commission.
The argument that the last person in a string contract deserves more that those before, is not a valid argument unless such has contributed more to the whole affair as a PI; in that , all members of a particular string contact are equally just as important as the whole string connection was needed to ensure the information used submitted is used by a principal, because as stated , without the string contract being attached to a principal , there is no possibility of any deal let alone payment of commission if no informed Principal in involved. A PI next to the Principal enacting with a PI next to a end buyer or supplier does so on the ideal that the PI next to the end buyer or supplier is very well informed, otherwise the PI next to the Buyer/Seller stands supreme and treats the PI next to the end buyer or supplier as another sourcing entity.
In fact there could be 4 PI‘s in a string contract, but in fact only a maximum of two can enact upon the direct authority of the Principal who are the only recognised entities carrying ‘power’ below the principal if such are apparent. A PI working with a principal on one side on the fence may also often appear on the other side of the fence and as such is entitles to that side earns a commission payment as well, because even though the PI is simply another intermediary amongst others , the PI also hold power of the principal, and hence is aligned to the principal, in matter of deal closing , but is only aligned to the string contract , while an deal is being formed.
It’s the whole string contract which is unique, not each individual making up such. Therefore the principal has the right to decline to examine an offer or inquiry , or they may examine any such offer , and hence automatically infer that the interests of the intermediaries in a string contract are protected.
Some of URPIB rules are in house rules , others part of URPIB are actually tied to laws of international trade, hence unlike some intermediaries have suggested in the past , breaking URPIB rules could mean in some instances that you are breaking international laws.
The amount ‘earned’ by the Principal is no business of the intermediary. What is the business of the intermediary is to know what is the minimum amount that principal will protect and pay out and nothing more. Once this minimum amount is declared this is the amount that will be paid out is the only assurance given upon each successful delivery, hence here is where the ‘promise made finds its binding’. The minimum amount defined as consideration, as there is no commission payment due if a “sum’ has not been first made apparent.
“AGI” (Academy of Global Intermediaries) will be the controlling body administering FTN Exporting URPIB Rules. Current as of December 2010 Updated and fully revised June 2012.
ICC UCP Article 38 relates to the issue of a financial instrument for payment of goods by a UCP applicable DLC. The transfer fee relating to the issue of this DLC is for the expense of the End Buyer. Intermediaries must ensure that the ‘Offer’ and ‘Contract’ provides that these fees are for the account of the End Buyer. Article 38 Paragraph (C) implies that “Unless otherwise agreed” at the time of transfer, the said transfer fee must be paid by the Beneficiary. The End Buyer agrees with the Intermediary on the ‘Offer’ and ‘Contract’ to pay such a transfer fee, “On behalf of the Beneficiary”.
It’s irrelevant how such charges/ fee’s are paid, so long as ‘it’s paid by or on behalf‘ of the Beneficiary as defined, is sufficient to satisfy UCP requirements.
UCP: As of July 1st 2007 UCP 600 superseded UCP500. The Intermediary shall now only use UCP, current Incoterms and URPIB as a guiding set of Rules until advised further. All Intermediaries should consider using URPIB Rules while conducting their business as international trade Intermediaries. They have been compiled based on the extensive experience and knowledge of the author of these works. Attempting to trade using anything less concise and strict than the Doctrine provided in supported of these Rules, is both unacceptable and futile.
FTN Exporting deductions made on a successful transaction shall ensure payment is made to a recognised charity under its long standing ©Humano edict. Such deductions are drawn from FTN Exporting own gains. Such payments are made to included the names all those who have assisted in the closing of a successful transaction. 3.0% of personal gains made by the Principal, once secured, is considered a fair amount to be contributed. The charity in question will be a globally recognised charity, which is supported by a well-informed Internet site carrying contact information. Any Principal of Agency who has been personally supported by FTN Exporting or who have used, studied and relied upon trading information and Doctrine provided by FTN Exporting, shall also contribute to a recognised charity on any successful transaction closed, including anyone using these Rules of support and guidance. Agreeing to such an edict allows the entity the right to use these Rules no matter the nature of agency business being applied .
The ©Humano Edict is a FTN Exporting initiative in which intermediaries make a contribution for the purpose of helping those less fortunate than themselves. This is especially the case in Countries from which high value goods are exported but where workers do not enjoy basic human rights and are very poorly paid. For example, in the Dominican Republic, sugar cane farm workers are paid less than a dollar a day, while the goods they harvest are sold globally at world benchmark prices. FTN Exporting hopes that one day U.N. edicts encourage banks globally to follow suit, in allowing such to collect a small charitable fee on each DLC issued to buy goods, of which is collected to favour economically depressed third world Countries. These funds would be used to provide basic needs to people living in a state of abject poverty. Even at 10 cents per Tonne applied on such goods, as a Humano tax, collected via banks world-wide, would generate many millions of dollars annually to help those in need without End Buyers even noticing such deductions. California USA, pre 2010, alone generated more 1 Trillion dollars in financial transactions now giver perspective to the ©Humano edict. Humano: Human and ‘Mano’ derived from the Italian/ Latin term for Hand. (Hence- Helping Hand)
Special Note: WTMW, FYBR and ITSI Doctrine is written in a manner to convey how a Intermediary must trade independently as a Buyer/ Seller. Such a Doctrine is not designed for interaction with the Author or FTN Exporting, only because of the unique position it holds as a leading teacher for so many others. Invited supported and mentored traders and or FTNX Agents working with FTN Exporting often bypass the previous said IPG application to save time as such, associated traders after the first few times become wary on how hard it is to close a deal and often simply wait for the deal to go past ‘Offer’ stage, in where, as per such understanding, FTN no longer issues pay orders to anyone-
Incoterms 2010 due 1st of Jan 2011. FTN release the ITSI publication pre-Incoterms released. The rumour was that such delivery rules were going to be released as ‘incoterms 3000’. The correct term is ‘Incoterms 2010’.
It is the informed personal opinion and conviction of FTN Exporting that Incoterms 2010 has been found to be mephitic, ambiguous, contradictory and antonymous as it relates to the Intermediary business. FTN Exporting was not consulted on matters of Incoterms 2010, yet strangely enough, changes made are already incorporated years ago in the FTN Doctrine, reflecting again the superior nature of the Doctrine thanks to the brilliant mind of International Trade Expert and U.K Barrister, Professor Clive M. Schmitthoff (1992), in where FTN Exporting has studied the works of such intently , and in where the required mindset to be able to produce the said Doctrine first eventuated from after changes were adopted, tested and applied. Selected parts of the *ICC Chamber of Commerce Rules of Banking and Delivery (©ICC Paris France ) also play an important role in defining the doctrine. The emulations of English laws and rules of international trade rules (and indeed in matters of world class Sport events and rules to such I.e: Olympics) are copied world wide in part or fully, hence the Doctrine is underpinned by English law and Foreign Governance of such as well as contract formation rules in where the whole doctrine is made up of many formidable laws and rules of Agency and Trade.
The Doctrine is the structure and platform of trade made for Intermediary use. In where continental Europe internal cross border trade deals apply, European laws override small parts of the doctrine, but in where the use of EXW, DAP and DDP delivery modes are not offered as a part of the doctrine and as such European laws has no relevance to which Maritime applications of the doctrine is the prevailing application. Internal Russian laws apply to matter of goods being exported but such does not override matter of UCP use nor matters of delivery rules., accordingly Russian law may no be imposed as being a ruling legal application for use in the export of International type of goods. India, USA, England, and China and Past Colonies of of England apply matters of the doctrine in the first instance, hence applying that the majority of countries world wide are able to conduct business as per the doctrine in where the minority may entertain the part use of the doctrine is best assumed. No matter the country or laws used, no person of sound mind may consider to buy anything without first knowing what is being offered is a common-sense and logical approach of any business application ,as such, no matter the excuses given, common-sense applies as starting edict of the doctrine as well.
FTN Exporting own © ‘Ultra terms 2012’ shall replace the use in part ‘Incoterms’ in late 2013.