SWIFT MT700 Field 44A: When the Place of Receipt Contradicts Other Fields

Introduction

Field 44A (Place of Taking in Charge / Place of Receipt) is optional in the MT700 message under SWIFT SR2018, Category 7. It states the place where the carrier takes the goods in charge, or the place of receipt under a road, rail, inland waterway, courier, or expedited delivery arrangement. A credit may omit it, state it once, or state it in a way that disagrees with other routing, goods, or document fields. The defect is not that the field exists; it is that the place named in 44A cannot coexist on the presented documents with the ports, places, or delivery terms stated elsewhere.

Failure Modes

Failure Mode 1: Place of receipt conflicts with the port of loading in 44E

A credit states 44A as an inland receipt point and 44E as a port of loading. If the transport document shows the port of loading as the place of receipt, the two fields cannot both be satisfied.

Failure Mode 2: Receipt place contradicts the destination in 44F or 44B

Where 44A names one point and 44F or 44B names a destination the routing cannot support, the presentation forces the examining bank to reconcile incompatible movement data.

Failure Mode 3: Receipt place contradicts the delivery term in 45A

The goods description in 45A may state a trade term with a named place. If 44A names a different place, the routing and the price/delivery term disagree.

Failure Mode 4: 44A omitted where the nominated document requires a stated receipt place

When the document type nominated in 46A depends on a place of taking in charge, leaving 44A blank can leave the routing undefined.

Failure Mode 5: Narrative repeated with conflict in a related MT701

The MT700 usage rules state that information in a related MT701 must not conflict with information present in the MT700. A 44A narrative restated differently in MT701 creates a direct conflict.

Resolution

1. Read field 44A together with 44E, 44F, and 44B before issuing or examining the credit.
2. Confirm that the named receipt or taking-in-charge place is consistent with the port of loading or airport of departure.
3. Check that the receipt place supports the stated destination under 44F or 44B.
4. Compare 44A against the delivery term and named place in 45A.
5. Verify the transport document type nominated in 46A against the place function 44A performs.
6. If a related MT701 is sent, confirm 44A is not restated with a conflicting narrative.
7. Apply Article 14(d) to test whether data in the presented document conflicts with the credit or other documents.
8. Where a conflict is found, record the specific field pair and the nature of the disagreement before deciding on refusal.

Conclusion

Field 44A is optional, but when used it must sit coherently inside the credit's routing structure. The control is to prove that the place of receipt or taking in charge can coexist with the ports, destinations, and delivery terms named elsewhere. Articles 20-28 supply the transport-document routing framework; Article 14 supplies the conflict test. A presentation should be cleared only after the routing fields compile cleanly against one another.

FAQ

Is field 44A mandatory in an MT700?
No. SWIFT SR2018 defines 44A as Optional. A credit may omit it entirely, though the routing should remain coherent through the other 44-series fields.

Can 44A and 44E name the same place?
It depends on the transport type. For multimodal or overland movement, 44A (receipt/taking in charge) and 44E (loading port/airport) legitimately name different points; for a pure seaport shipment they may coincide, but the documents must show the relationship clearly.

What happens if a related MT701 restates 44A with different wording?
The MT700 usage rules forbid a related MT701 from conflicting with information present in the MT700. A conflicting restatement is a discrepancy that should be resolved before presentation.

Does Article 14(d) apply to field conflicts?
Yes. Article 14(d) requires that data in a document not conflict with the credit, the document itself, other stipulated documents, or international standard banking practice. Field-level contradictions surface through this article.

Who decides whether a routing conflict is material?
The examining bank decides under Article 14 on the basis of the documents alone. The applicant's view does not control the examination standard.

Source Notes

• SWIFT SR2018, Category 7, MT700 field 44A (Optional, Option A, 65x narrative; place of taking in charge / place of receipt). Context only.
• UCP 600 Articles 20-28 (transport document routing) and Article 14. Context only.
• MT700 usage rules on related MT701 content (no conflict with MT700 information). Context only.