Purchase Order Header Payment Terms <> Detail Payment Terms

frankieg73

Member
There are a handful of purchase orders in our system where the F4301.PHPTC <> F4311.PDPTC.

Testing has revealed that using the "Copy" feature in P4310 to copy an existing PO into a new PO can create this problem. But only when the Header Terms are different from the Detail Terms in the original "copied from" PO. This still does not explain how the original order was created with the pay terms inconsistency. And we still wonder if other scenarios may be creating new PO's with this pay terms inconsistency.

We have also tried to edit open PO's where the terms are inconsistent via the P4310 forms W4310B (header) and F4310A (detail), but you can only change the terms value in the header and making that change does not affect the terms of the detail line items.

1. How are PO's be created with header payment terms that differ from the detail pay terms?
2. Is there an E1 app that will allow the business users to update existing open orders with this inconsistency?

We use standard pay terms from the F0014.
JDE E1 v 8.12, Tools release 8.98
 
Thanks, B JOSH. We have been doing that but I am hoping that there is a way that the business users can fix this issue without I.S. intervention.
 
Go to the purchase order header and enable payment terms udc. This is populate header payment terms to details.
 
We you enable the payment terms on the header to detail, it blanks out the description on any text lines on the order. Same thing happens if you enable the carrier. Anyone have this issue?
 
Back
Top