With theforeign tradeAs the environment grows increasingly complex, export enterprises may face third-party impersonation fraud risks when seeking new orders. This article analyzes an actual fraud case to demonstrate common characteristics of such fraud and provides corresponding risk prevention strategies for exporters.

With changes in foreign trade conditions, export enterprises pursuing new orders can easily become targets of third-party impersonation fraud.

Case Summary: Guangdong home appliance Company A suffered goods loss after completing a transaction with Mr. L, who claimed to represent German Company B.

After Company A signed a sales contract with Mr. L and shipped the goods as required, it failed to receive payment on time. This made Company A realize potential issues and immediately file a claim with Sinosure.

Upon receiving Company As claim request, Sinosure quickly adopted a two-pronged strategy: reviewing trade documents submitted by Company A while commissioning local channels in Germany for further investigation and debt recovery.

Through detailed document review, Sinosure identified several obvious suspicious points:

Business registration information of Company B showed its main business was clothing and footwear wholesale, while Company A sold home appliances - a clear mismatch with Company Bs business scope.

Trade emails between Company A and Mr. L revealed he used a gmail.com email suffix, and the company website address he provided appeared to be under maintenance with no valid content.

The notify party, consignee names and contact information in the bill of lading completely mismatched Company Bs details. Furthermore, Company B had no business presence in Greece, while Mr. L requested goods be delivered to Piraeus port in Greece.

Sinosure contacted Company B through its German channels, and Company Bs feedback further confirmed fraud suspicions:

Company B explicitly stated they had never conducted any transaction with Company A nor received Company As goods.

The stamp used on the proforma invoice provided by Company A wasnt Company Bs official seal, and the signature wasnt from any authorized personnel of Company B.

Most crucially, Mr. L wasnt a Company B employee, and his email suffix completely differed from Company Bs official email format.

Combining document review and field investigation results, Sinosure concluded that Mr. L likely impersonated Company B for fraudulent purposes, while Company A failed to detect this due to earlier oversight, resulting in goods being stolen.

? Transaction Background:Often involves first-time transactions with the counterparty.
? Identity Verification:Exporters may fail to conduct proper identity verification.
? Name Impersonation:Scammers typically impersonate well-known or reputable companies.
? Payment Terms:Mostly 100% open account transactions without advance payment.
? Communication Methods:Use unofficial email for communication.
? Bill of Lading Information:The consignee on the bill of lading does not match the information on the sales contract.

? Identity Verification:Export enterprises should conduct multi-channel identity verification for first-time buyers.
? Payment Strategy:For initial transactions, it is recommended to choose cautious payment terms and require advance payment.
? Formal Communication:For key matters, request confirmation through the counterpartys official company email.

The above content is sourced from the China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation.ZhongShen International TradeAs a one - stop importExport Representationservice provider, it can provide customizedimport and exportsolutions for various industries. If you need foreign trade import and export agency services, welcome to contact our company for business consultation. The consultation hotline is 139 - 1787 - 2118.