Warning signs in a petroleum storage offer

Identity and contact inconsistencies

Look for conflicting company identities, unexplained contact changes or reluctance to establish an independent operator contact. A discrepancy is a reason to investigate, not an automatic finding of fraud.

Pressure without clarification

Pause when urgent payment or commitment is requested while basic questions about authority, service scope or issuer confirmation remain unanswered. Ask for written clarification of the arrangement and its conditions.

Document what remains unresolved

Keep a record of the claims, sources and responses. The Port of Rotterdam has publicly described storage spoofing involving nonexistent capacity or inventories; specific offers still require their own evidence-based assessment.

Look for contradictions that need a pause

Warning signs include inconsistent company names, mismatched domains, unexplained changes in payment instructions and pressure to proceed before basic questions are answered. None should be dismissed because the offer is attractively priced. A warning sign is a reason to investigate, not a standalone determination that a party is fraudulent.

• Compare identities across the offer, contract and invoice.
• Question capacity claims that cannot be confirmed.
• Check new contacts independently.

Test the offer against a real storage requirement

Ask for clarity on product acceptance, capacity, term, movement arrangements and the charging basis. A proposal that avoids these details may be difficult to assess even if the counterparty is genuine. Keep the difference between indicative discussion and confirmed commercial terms visible. Do not allow urgency to replace the normal evidence and approval process.

• Request an itemised quote and stated assumptions.
• Identify who will contract and who will give instructions.
• Record unresolved points before making a decision.

Choose a proportionate next step

If the information is inconsistent, stop the relevant commitment while the issue is checked through reliable channels. Preserve the original communications and documents. A scoped due diligence review can organise the questions and evidence, while legal, financial or inspection specialists address matters within their expertise. No checklist can guarantee the outcome of a transaction.

• Use the verification checklist to structure the review.
• Do not share unnecessary sensitive information.
• Resume only when the decision-maker understands the unresolved risks.