Francisco,

You should have gotten my email back to Justin.

 We have two sets of online customers coming thru, one set that originates 
from Houston Credit and one set originates from London Credit.  We are 
responsible for responding for Houston Credit based customers, and London 
Legal for London based customers.

A side issue to all of this is how we gather legal advice on trading around 
the world.  We don't want to duplicate efforts and costs by having both 
Houston and London Legal Departments requesting separate advice.  Our office 
is responsible for legal advice in the Americas and Southeast Asia, while 
London leads the efforts in Europe .  After we each receive advice we provide 
copies and communicate to each other the advice received.  Even though we 
both receive the same legal advice, sometimes we don't always agree on the 
approach in a particular country, and at the end of the day, each Legal Dept. 
is responsible for their own clients.

As far as the advice on Mexico, Chile and Argentina, as I told Justin, the 
advice I have received from the Houston lawyers is that although we can 
transact financial products in these countries, we have certain legal risks 
in doing so, and we need to do corporate due diligence to check their 
appropriate corporate documents to see if they are allowed to do these, and 
further, most of these counterparties have not filed consents to service of 
process here in the U.S., which we require in order to trade with us.  Since 
what these counterparties usually want to trade are physical products, we 
don't waste our time doing the due diligence at this point.  If a 
counterparty really wanted to trade financial we would spend the time 
resolving those issues.

As you become the responsible lawyer, first in Mexico, and maybe in the rest 
of South America, you may have a different opinion on these issues and we can 
certainly change our policies at any time.  All of the above is just what my 
current direction is from our lawyers.




	Francisco Pinto Leite@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	01/25/2001 08:34 AM
		 
		 To: Tana Jones@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Re: Femsa Empaques, S.A. de C.V.

I can answer this but my only question is whether we also "control" the 
process when the Enron entity is a UK entity?

FPL
---------------------- Forwarded by Francisco Pinto Leite/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 
on 01/25/2001 08:42 AM ---------------------------
From: Lara Fields@ECT on 01/25/2001 08:46 AM GMT
To: Francisco Pinto Leite/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron London - EOL 
Product Control Group/LON/ECT@ECT 

Subject: Re: Femsa Empaques, S.A. de C.V.  

Hi Francisco

Just so that I can inform the rest of my team and the marketing people - why 
is it that we require Masters with Mexican counterparties and not with 
counterparties from other countries?  Would it make any difference if the 
Enron Entity was in the UK like Enron Metals Limited rather than US?

Does this apply for offline trading as well?

Regards,
Lara


To: Justin Boyd@ECT
cc: Lara Fields@ECT, Tana Jones@ECT 

Subject: Femsa Empaques, S.A. de C.V.

Justin:

 I am the "new" lawyer in charge of our financial trading operations in 
Mexico.

I am told that we do not trade financial with any Mexican counterparty 
without going through our normal due diligence process.  At the end of the 
day we need a Master in place with any Mexican counterparty with whom we 
trade (financial) online or otherwise.  I checked and we do not have a Master 
in place with this counterparty.

FPL