---
id: KB-LG-023
url: https://app.codecontract.io/help/logistics/declaring-on-someone-elses-behalf
idioma: en
categoria: sector-logistica
subcategoria: transitarios
audiencia: usuario
nivel: avanzado
actualizado: 2026-08-13
tambienEn: [es]
relacionados: [KB-LG-022, KB-LG-019]
citadoPor: [KB-LG-013]
---

# Declaring on someone else's behalf

_You file what you are told and you are the one who signs. Your entire defence is being able to show who told you what, and when._

**Responde a:** customs representative liability · declaring with data provided by the client · how to protect myself if the client gives wrong information · written client instructions customs

Your job is turning what a client sends you into something the authorities accept. **You know procedure and you do not know their product**: you are told what it is, what it is worth and where it comes from, and you file it. It is a service position carrying an exposure that is not always priced as one, and all of it turns on a single point: **being able to show what you were told**.

## The three sources of a problem, and only one is yours

| Where it comes from | Example | What prevents it |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The client informed wrongly | A wrong value or origin | Holding in writing what they said |
| The client did not inform | A document was missing and it went anyway | Recording what was asked for |
| You applied it wrongly | A debatable judgement of your own | The reasoning, written and dated |
| **Nobody knows what happened** | **No trail of anything** | **The worst case and the commonest** |

> [!IMPORTANT]
> **A verbal instruction does not exist.** That is the whole sentence for this position. The client who phones in a hurry to say it is worth less, that the origin is different, or to clear it and they will send the paper later, is making a decision with your name underneath. Asking for it in writing is not mistrust or bureaucracy: it is the only thing separating who informed from who filed when someone asks two years later.

## What must be showable for each file

1. **What the client sent you and when** — With the date and the document exactly as it arrived.
2. **What you asked for and what came back** — Including the requests they never answered.
3. **What was finally filed** — And if it departed from what you were told, why.
4. **And who authorised the doubtful call** — By name. «The client said» is not a name.

> [!WARNING]
> The scenario to avoid above all others: **clearing without a document on the promise that it arrives tomorrow**. It is a reasonable request, made by a client who matters to you, and it almost always ends well. The problem is the case where it does not: then there is a completed clearance, a document that does not exist and a conversation that only happened by phone. If you are going to take that risk —sometimes the business calls for it— have it in writing who asked and on what undertaking.

> [!NOTE]
> What liability a representative assumes depending on the form of representation, what they may require of their client and how far their duty to check extends **is determined by the applicable rules and the contract, and settled by your adviser**. Here we cover the operational part: how to leave a trail of what was received and requested without slowing clearance.

**Can I refuse to declare something that does not add up?**

Your contract and the rules decide that. What you can always do is put it in writing.

**Does an email count as an instruction?**

It is infinitely better than a phone call, and it is what exists in practice.

**Should I keep what I asked for and never received?**

Above all that. It is what proves it was asked for.

## Ejemplos

**The client gives an instruction by phone and later remembers it differently.**

- Asks for written confirmation and files it with the case

→ What was agreed stops depending on two memories.

**Clearance goes ahead on the promise of a document that never arrives.**

- Records what was asked for, when, and what came back

→ The broken undertaking is documented.

**Two years on a file is queried and the context is missing.**

- Keeps what was received, requested and filed together

→ The file explains itself.

**Each operator keeps their emails in their own inbox.**

- Gathers the file's documentation in a shared place

→ The answer does not depend on who is in that day.

**Chasing the client for a document takes half a day.**

- Chases automatically until it arrives

→ The chase stops competing with the day's work.

**It is unclear who authorised a debatable decision.**

- Records who asked for what and when

→ The authorisation has a name and a date.