▎1. Sender’s Responsibility (Buyer’s Bank):
•
Does sending an MT199 create a legal obligation?
No. No financial, legal, or fund transfer obligations occur.
•
Key Point:
Even if the message includes phrases like “customer’s balance confirmation” or RWA (Ready, Willing, and Able), it is non-binding unless supported by formal contracts.
▎2. Seller’s Position:
•
Does the seller receive any legal rights or guarantees?
No. MT199 is neither a payment guarantee nor a valid banking document.
•
Key Point:
This message is merely an informal indication of the buyer’s interest and provides no protection for the seller.
▎3. Buyer’s Funds Status:
•
Does sending an MT199 result in the blocking of funds?
No. No funds are blocked, reserved, or transferred.
•
Financial Commitment Alternatives:
If you need to block or guarantee funds, use these messages:
•
MT760 (Bank Guarantee/SBLC)
•
MT700 (Letter of Credit/LC)
•
MT103 (Irrevocable Payment).
▎4. Main Use of MT199:
•
It is merely an informal communication tool between banks for:
– Confirming initial intentions
– Responding to inquiries
– Sending non-standard instructions.
▎5. Critical Warning:
•
MT199 is never a substitute for financial guarantee documents (like LC or SBLC)!
•
MT799 (Pre-advisory Message) is also non-binding, even if it contains RWA/POF.
▎ Summary Table:
| Parameter | Status |
|————————-|————–|
| Legal Obligation of Sender | None
|
| Rights of Seller | None
|
| Blocking of Funds | No
|
| Operational Value | Informal Communication
|
—
▎
Key Questions for Practical Use:
1. Can the seller ship the goods immediately upon receiving MT199?
No! This message does not provide any payment guarantee.
2. If the buyer’s bank confirms the customer’s balance in MT199, can it be relied upon?
No. This confirmation is only informational and is not binding.
3. What message should we request to ensure actual blocking of funds?
MT760 (Bank Guarantee) or MT700 (Letter of Credit).
