How to verify an alleged EN590 TTT transaction in Rotterdam or Houston tanks

1. Define the exact claim

Specify product, grade, volume, terminal, tank, owner, contractual seller, TTT procedure, inspector, title-transfer point and payment condition. Broad wording such as “product in Houston” or “tanks in Rotterdam” is not verifiable.

2. Separate location, custody and ownership

Product may be physically held at a terminal while the seller lacks ownership, disposal rights or authority to order a transfer. Custody, title and operational control are different concepts.

3. Verify the terminal operator independently

Obtain the domain, telephone number and contact person from institutional or corporate sources, not solely from supplied documents. The terminal should confirm only what it is legally authorised to confirm.

4. Review the TSA and storage rights

Check parties, validity, facility, capacity, tank, permitted product, nomination rights, restrictions and outstanding balances. A genuine agreement may be expired, belong to another entity or grant fewer rights than claimed.

5. Do not treat “proof of product” as universal proof

An invoice, TSR, ATV, dip-test authorisation, allocation letter or inspection report covers only part of the issue. Authenticity, date, issuer, addressee, scope and connection to the current seller must be tested.

6. Define Q&Q inspection

The buyer should know who appoints and pays the inspector, which tank is inspected, the method used, sampling procedure, report recipient and consequences of non-compliant quantity or quality.

7. Test whether TTT is physically executable

Tank-to-tank requires identified tanks, transfer lines or equipment, compatibility, an operating window, approvals, nomination and terminal acceptance. The acronym TTT proves none of these conditions.

8. Connect payment to title transfer

The contract must state which documentary and operational condition precedes payment, when title passes, what happens to risk and which remedy applies if transfer cannot be completed.

9. Review the intermediary chain

Every additional intermediary increases the risk of distortion, duplicate offers and false authority. The principal must be identifiable and any mandate independently confirmed.

10. Decide through conditions, not impressions

Classify the result as verified, plausible but pending, contradictory or unverifiable. Do not proceed because documents accumulate; proceed only when critical conditions are confirmed by independent sources.