Inappropriate Incoterms usage

There are only 11 Incoterms as per the 2010 version but defunct Incoterms like DDU & non-existent ones like C & I continue to be used in business. From the marine insurance standpoint, what we draw majorly from Incoterms are

1) Who has the responsibility to insure

2) What is the Risk-transfer point

3) Who has the responsibility to arrange transportation for the major leg

4) Who has the responsibility for loading & unloading.

Seller’s responsibility to arrange insurance is only in case of CIF & CIP. In case other Incoterms are used, Seller can still buy insurance to protect his interest but he must make sure that it is contingent in nature. Otherwise, if both parties insure the same transit separately without knowing, the policies have to contribute rateably to the loss. This is something insurers miss out too while granting cover ” irrespective of terms of sale” on warehouse to warehouse basis. This is fraught with anomalies.

Eg. FOB export from an Indian port where cover is sought and granted on a warehouse to warehouse basis. Loss discovered at final destination and buyer claims under his insurance. If existence of this FOB policy is known, it has to contribute. Can a foreign currency payment be made on a FOB policy? No. This is applicable to other Incoterms too.