The straight bill of lading is regarded as the documents of title except in American law after The Rafaela S case. The Carewins case also decided that the exclusion clause of bill of lading did not exempt carriers from liability when the carriers delivered the cargo to the consignee without the production of original bill of lading. And the court said that the carrier was responsible for delivering the goods against a forged bill of lading regardless of exemption clause of bill of lading in the Motis case. It may be assumed through these cases that the straight bill of lading as a document of title gives documentary security to the banks in trade finance. However, there can be some downside to the efficacy of the straight bill of lading as collateral. First, when it is subject to the English law, the shipper can arbitrarily change the consignee different from the one named in the document. Second, some bills of lading bear provisions relating to the carrier delivering the goods upon reasonable proof of identity without the surrender of an original and/or genuine bill of lading.