LECTURE 10 – METHODS OF PAYMENT

 

1.0  CASH PAYMENT

 

The meaning of the term 'money' depends very much on the context in which it is used. Money serves a purely abstract function as a unit of account. It is also a store of value and a medium of exchange.

 

Physical money has five important legal characteristics. First, its value in law is not its intrinsic value as paper or metal but the sum, or unit of account, in which the note or coin is denominated. So a five-pound note has a legal value of five pounds, even though the value of the paper of which it consists is negligible.  Secondly, and as a corollary, money is not bought or exchanged; it is either borrowed or received by way of gift or in discharge of an obligation owed to the recipient. Thirdly, money is fully negotiable, in the sense that one who receives notes or coins in good faith and for value obtains a good title even if his transferor stole them or his title was otherwise defective. Fourthly, unless otherwise agreed a creditor is not entitled to demand or obliged to accept anything other than money in discharge of the debt owed to him. Fifthly, money is a fungible, that is, any unit is legally interchangeable with any other unit or combination of units of the same denominated value.

 

2.0 THE CHEQUES

 

In the checking context, the most common way for the customer to authorize payment (although not the only way) is by writing a check, which authorizes the bank to use funds in the customer's account to pay the amount of the check to the payee. Accordingly, if the payee presents the check to the customer's bank (the payor bank, as discussed above), it would be proper for the payor bank to "honor" the check. If the payor bank does honor the check, it gives funds in the amount of the check to the payee and charges the customer's account for the amount of the check.

 

(a) Overdrafts  

Most banks are willing to agree to pay overdrafts for their customers  (at least for some of their customers)  by providing "overdraft protection." Thus, for a fee, banks agree in advance that they will honor checks up to a preset limit even if the checks are drawn against insufficient funds.

(b)       Stopping Payment 

A second problem about the bank's right to pay a check arises when a customer changes its mind after it has written a check and decides that it no longer wants the payor bank to pay the payee. That could happen for several reasons, ranging from dissatisfaction with the goods or services purchased with the check to completely unrelated financial distress (such as loss of a job) that alters the customer's willingness to pay. A notable feature of the checking system is that the customer's decision to pay does not become final at the time that the customer issues the check.

(c) Death or Incompetence of the Drawer  

Even if the account has adequate funds and the drawer does not decide to stop payment, the drawer's death or incompetence effectively terminates the drawer's intent to pay the check. Of course, it would be impractical to obligate the payor bank to reject any check presented after the death or incapacity of one of its customers.

 

Remedies for Improper Payment

Sometimes a bank pays a check that was not properly payable. The most likely problem is (a) that the customer in fact did not write the check, (b) that payment was not made to the payee or some other person entitled to enforce the check, or (c) that the bank failed to comply with a valid order to stop payment. The basic remedy for an improper payment is simple and intuitively obvious. The bank must reverse the improper transaction. Specifically, because the item was not properly payable, the bank cannot sustain the charge on the customer's account based on that item.  

 

3.0 CREDIT CARD

 

The system involves four major participants: a purchaser that holds a credit card, the issuer that issues the credit card, a merchant that makes a sale, and a merchant bank that collects payment for the merchant. The credit card reflects a relationship between the card-holder and an issuing bank. The cardholder can make purchases on the account either by using the card directly or by using the number without the card. The issuing bank commits to pay for purchases that the cardholder makes in accordance with the agreement between the issuer and the cardholder. What that means, among other things, is that the merchant that accepts a credit card ordinarily gets paid even if the cardholder ultimately fails to pay its bills.

 

From the cardholder's perspective, payment with a credit card is a simple affair. In a face-to-face transaction, the merchant normally swipes the card on a machine and produces a slip for the consumer to sign a few moments later, on which the cardholder promises to pay the transaction amount. In a transaction that is completed over the telephone (or the Internet) rather than face-to-face, the card-holder provides the card number to the merchant, and the transaction proceeds. The only difference is that the merchant does not have a signed slip as evidence that the cardholder in fact authorized the transaction.

 

4.0 Debit Cards

 

The key to the debit-card system is that it replaces the paper check with an electronic impulse that directs the bank to transfer funds to the customer (when the card is used to withdraw cash at an ATM) or to transfer funds to a third party (when the card is used in a sales transaction). The use of the electronic impulse removes the need for the check and thus many of the cumbersome problems raised by a paper-based checking system.

 

There are two basic uses of a debit card. The first use is where the cards initially became popular: depositing and withdrawing money from an account without the burden of going to the bank and waiting to see a teller during regular banking hours. In that use, a debit card allows a customer to go to an ATM and perform any of the transactions that the customer could perform directly with a teller at the bank: withdrawing funds, depositing funds, inquiring about balances, or transferring funds among different accounts. Those functions do not involve payments to third parties; rather, they are limited to adjustment of the relationship between the customer and the bank where the customer maintains its account. Thus, they are not the sort of substitute-check transactions that involve use of the debit card as a payment system.

 

5.0 The Wire-Transfer System

 

Wire-transfer payments are attractive to businesses because they offer almost instantaneous payment at the time of the transaction. When a payee receives a payment by wire transfer, the payment normally reaches the payee in the form of immediately available funds in the payee's bank account. Immediate funds are much more satisfying to the payee than payment by check or credit card. The largest risk that the payee faces is that its own bank will become insolvent before the payee withdraws the funds.

 

6.0 Internet Money

 

The credit card currently is the payment system of choice for transactions on the Internet, being used in about 99% of Internet purchases as of 1998. For several reasons, however, it is doubtful that credit cards can provide a satisfactory long-term vehicle for those transactions. The biggest current problem is the lack of security on the Internet, which makes it imprudent to transmit credit-card numbers over the Internet.

 

More debilitating, however, have been consumer concerns about this fraud. One 1998 survey reported 40% of online users do not make online purchases because of security concerns.

 

6.1 Minting Ecoins

 

As with any payment system, the user must start by arranging to have the stakeholder make payments on the user's behalf. To get access to DigiCash, a user opens an ecash account at the institution that is operating the system (the issuer) and makes an initial deposit to that account, either by wire transfer or by some more traditional method (such as mailing a check or cash). The issuer then sends the user an account number and a password. The user downloads the operating software from DigiCash's World Wide Web home page. The software contains Chaum's contribution to the process: an extraordinarily sophisticated encryption system that "mints" electronic "coins"—ecoins—for the user to spend.

 

The heart of the coin is nothing more than an extremely large randomly generated serial number, so large that the probability of random duplication is insignificant; the common phrase is that the coin's number is "probabilistically unique." To create a usable coin, the user's software fashions an encrypted electronic bundle that carries the serial number (an ecoin). The user's software then contacts the issuer, which checks the validity of the ecoin and "stamps" an electronic signature (sometimes called a "digital" signature) on the exterior of the ecoin to verify the issuer's approval of the coin. The electronic signature is a uniquely identifying character string that the issuer imprints with a secret private key. The process of imprinting that signature includes a numerical calculation based on the text of the message to which the signature is attached (in this case the serial number and amount of the ecoin).

 

After checking the ecoin and signing it, the issuer sends the ecoin back to the user and deducts funds from the user's account in an amount equal to the amount of the ecoin. In the DigiCash system, that is done by a movement of funds from a bank account to the user's "mint." When that deduction has been made, the first step of the process is complete. The user has paid to the issuer funds equal to the amount of the ecoin. The ecoin reflects the issuer's agreement to disburse those funds in accordance with the directions of the user.

 

7.0 Documentary Letters of Credit

 

In a documentary credit, a bank(s) gives an independent undertaking to credit a named party's account. This party is called the beneficiary and is normally the seller. This undertaking(s) is conditional on the tender, in time, of conforming documents. The mechanism is triggered on the instructions of the buyer.

 

The requirements vis-a-vis the documentary credit, if this is the method of payment agreed between seller and buyer, are set out in the contract of sale, and include:

 

(a)   the documents required to be tendered to the banks in order to obtain payment;

(b)  an indication whether the buyer can choose the banks to  implement the documentary credit or whether the seller has nominated one or more of the banks to be used;

(c)   the type of credit which the seller wants opened;

(d)  currency of payment.

 

7.1 Legal Structure of Documentary Credit

There are three main types of documentary credit:

(a)   irrevocable/confirmed documentary credit;

(b)  irrevocable/unconfirmed documentary credit;

(c)   revocable/unconfirmed documentary credit.

 

BUYER AND ISSUING BANK

 In each case the buyer will approach a bank, usually in his/her own country and usually one of his/her choice, to request the opening of a documentary credit in favour of the seller, on the terms set out in the contract of sale. If the bank agrees, a contractual relationship comes into existence between the buyer and the bank known as the issuing bank IB in which the IB, as agent of the buyer, agrees to issue the type of credit requested, in the time requested and to arrange payment against conforming documents. The buyer agrees to pay commission and agrees to put the bank in funds before payment out by the bank, or agrees to reimburse the bank when payment is

 

ISSUING BANK AND ADVISING BANK

The IB will now enter into one or maybe two or more contracts. In implementing its instructions in its agency contract with the buyer, the IB will approach another bank usually in the sellers country, and sometimes already designated in its contract of agency with the buyer. This bank is known as an advising bank (AB). (It is also referred to as a correspondent bank, but the term advising bank will be used here.) The AB will be asked by the IB to inform the seller/beneficiary that a credit has been opened by the IB in his/her favour. It may also be asked to take up the documents and make payment. In these circumstances it will be an advising/nominated bank Note here that not in every case will an advising bank act also as the nominated bank and vice versa. In some cases the issuing bank will approach one of its branches in the beneficiary s country to arrange for it to take up the documents and make payment.

 

The advising bank (AB) or the advising/nominated bank (AB/NB) may be asked to add its own confirmation- (CB) (see 3.11.4). If the advising or advising/nominated bank accepts the proposals, a contract of agency arises between the IB and the chosen bank and as appropriate the IB undertakes to pay commission and put the advising/nominated bank in funds before the date for payment, or reimburse.

 

IRREVOCABLE UNDERTAKING: ISSUING BANK AND BENEFICIARY

 

Where the IB on the instructions of its Principal (the buyer) issues an irrevocable undertaking to pay to the beneficiary, it gives an independent undertaking, i.e  as a principal to the beneficiary. This undertaking becomes binding as soon as the letter of credit - sent by the AB, in performance of its obligation as agent of the IB to inform the beneficiary of &e opening of the credit - reaches the hands of the beneficiary (Homzeh Mains & Sons v British Imex Industries Ltd [1958] 2 QB 127). There is at this point a binding contract between the IB and the seller/beneficiary in which the IB undertakes to pay against conforming documents (for more on what amounts to a good tender, see 3.14). It may be difficult, if not Impossible, to find the required consideration for a contract coming into existence at this time. In Hamzeh Malas v British Imex Industries Jenkins LJ stated that it must be regarded as established by mercantile custom recognised all over the world that a binding contract comes into existence at the time the documentary credit reaches the hands of the beneficiary. No bank has sought to dispute the existence of a contractual relationship with the beneficiary existing at that time. The credit which has been issued here is called an irrevocable credit. On non-payment against a conforming tender, the seller/beneficiary will have a right of claim in contract against the IB.

 

CONFIRMATION: CONFIRMING BANK AND BENEFICIARY

 

The AB or AB/NB, in agreeing to advise the seller/beneficiary of the opening of the credit, may have been asked to give its own independent undertaking to pay against conforming documents. Whether it has been asked will depend on what the seller wanted and thus what went into the documentary credit clause in the contract of sale. This in turn would have become part of the buyer's instructions to the IB. The undertaking given by the AB or AB/NB is called a confirmation, and the AB or AB/ NB becomes a confirming bank (CB). Where the letter of credit issued by the IB is irrevocable and the letter of credit informing the seller/beneficiary of its existence has added to it the confirmation of the CB, the payment mechanism is called an 'irrevocable/confirmed letter of credit'. Again, following Hamzeh Molds & Sons v British Imex Industries, the confirmation becomes binding as soon as the letter of credit is received by the beneficiary. If the CB, the party directly responsible for payment, refuses to make/permit payment against a conforming tender, the seller/beneficiary will have a contractual remedy against it.

 

IRREVOCABLE/CONFIRMED LETTER OF CREDIT

 

The irrevocable/confirmed letter of credit is really the best the seller can obtain if a documentary credit is used. On a wrongful refusal to pay, the seller has a contractual remedy against (a) the CB, (b) the IB, and, if the letter of credit is a form of conditional payment only, (c) the buyer on the contract of sale. The seller/beneficiary will usually pursue his/her remedies against the CB, since this bank is situated in the seller's own country and the disadvantages of foreign litigation and enforcement abroad are thus avoided.

 

IRREVOCABLE/UNCONFIRMED LETTER OF CREDIT

 

Where the seller in the contract of sale did not feel it necessary to have, or could not obtain the agreement on the part of the buyer to add the confirmation of an advising or advising/nominated bank, the credit will be irrevocable/unconfirmed. What has been said above about the position of the buyer and the IB in relation to the seller still applies. However, the advising or advising/nominated bank, by not adding its confirmation cannot be sued on a refusal to pay. There will be no contractual relationship between the beneficiary and the advising or advising/nominated bank. The beneficiary can still pursue a contractual remedy against the IB and perhaps also the buyer but not the AB.                                          

 

REVOCABLE/UNCONFIRMED LETTER OF CREDIT

 

It may be that the parties in the contract of sale agree on the use of a documentary credit in order to enable the seller to obtain payment but they do not feel it necessary from the nature of their relationship, e.g., the parties are associate companies, to open an irrevocable credit. Or it may be that the seller cannot demand the opening of an irrevocable credit because of his/her weak bargaining position. In these circumstances the credit which the seller will receive is a revocable credit. Such a credit will not be confirmed. The credit is thus a revocable/unconfirmed credit. Here the documentary credit, as far as the beneficiary is concerned, merely acts as a conduit pipe for the passage of funds from buyer to seller.

 

8.0 Negotiable Instruments

 

An instrument is a document of title to money. As a documentary intangible, it is the physical embodiment of the payment obligation, and its possession (with any necessary endorsement in favour of the possessor) is the best evidence of entitlement to the money it represents. The right to receive payment belongs to the holder for the time being, is exercised by production of the instrument to the obligee or his authorized agent and is transferred by delivery, with any requisite indorsement.

 

Whether a writing is an instrument, that is, whether possession of it is recognized as carrying with it the right to the specified  sum of money or security for money, depends on mercantile usage and on statute, and the list of instruments is not closed. In practice, instruments as a class usually possess distinctive characteristics without which a writing is unlikely to be given recognition as an instrument. Thus, the document is traditionally concise and no greater in size than enables it to be conveniently carried and transferred; its terms are limited to payment obligations, security for payment (if given) and (in the case of scrip) the right to exchange it for the specified bonds or debentures. Given that a document is an instrument, the next question is whether it is negotiable or non-negotiable, which again depends on mercantile usage and statute.

 

The promissory note, that is, a document in which A promises to pay a sum of money to B, is of long standing as a credit instrument. But the creditor might find it inconvenient to collect payment himself at the due date and might wish to appoint an agent for that purpose. If the note provided simply for payment by A to B, then in any proceedings B's agent would have to produce a formal authority from B to collect payment. But if the note itself provided for payment to B or his nominee, or to B or other producer (i.e. holder) of the note, then A could not contest the right of the producer to collect payment, for A himself had provided for it in the terms of his undertaking.

 

The bill of exchange

 

Though instruments resembling bills of exchange have been known for over a thousand years, the development of the bill of exchange in the form in which we now know it begins with the great fairs, international meeting places where merchants from all over Europe transacted business in accordance with that body of law, evidence and procedure established by international usage and known as the law merchant.

 

Each merchant selling goods desired to be paid in his own currency. The currency exchanges were effected at the fairs by professional money-exchangers, who were conversant with exchange rates and thus provided a currency clearing house, which is the progenitor of the modern foreign exchange system. It was natural for creditors who wished to collect, and debtors who wished to pay, to appoint exchangers to do it for them. But since the physical transportation of money was inconvenient and hazardous, and since exchangers had many dealings to settle among themselves, the unnecessary inconvenience of continual payments and repayments of monies soon became obvious.  The merchants of Lombardy therfore devised a system by which exchangers could, through using correspondents in the creditor's country, localize payment and avoid physical transportation of money.

 

Suppose that B in Milan wished to pay S in London for goods bought by B from S. The following procedure could be adopted.

(1) B went to X, a Milan money-changer, and put him in funds, in lire, for the price and X's charges.

(2) X drew a bill, i.e. a written request or instruction on Y, his foreign correspondent in London, requiring Y to pay the sum named to S. X sent this bill to S.

(3) S presented the bill to Y, who paid him in sterling

(4) Later, X and Y, who would have had numerous dealings between themselves, struck a balance on their account and settled up.

 

The advantages of this system were manifold:

(1) The risk and expense of transporting gold from one country to another were avoided, the payment being localized through the bill procedure, while the number of settlements was greatly reduced.

(2) If B were being given credit, the embodying of his obligation in a bill would provide S with an instrument he could sell before maturity.

(3) If X knew B and Y knew S, each would be able to extend credit to its own national in respect of the bill.

 

TUTORIAL QUESTION

 

Tertius Lydgate comes to you with a problem about a $1,500 check that his wife Rosamund wrote recently on their joint bank account. The account contained only $50 at the time, and Tertius had declined to purchase overdraft protection from the bank at which he maintained the account. Still, the bank honored the check and has now written Tertius a letter threatening unspecified "serious consequences" if he does not reimburse the bank for the amount of the check.

a.  Is Tertius liable for the check?

b.      Would your answer change if you learned that Rosamund and he are estranged and that she used the funds to purchase an airplane ticket for a trip that she took (by herself) to London?