Payment Instrument

Hi List,

My understanding is that the payment instrument field on an AP record (PV) defaults from the vendor master data. However, I sometimes come across different PVs, for the same vendor, most of which have the "right" payment instrument and a few with a blank PI. What could cause this?

I believe this will result in these PVs not being part of the same payment group even if everything else is identical (bank account... etc). Is that correct?

Thanks,
J.

Jeff73,

Strange, can't remember seeing this before.

May I suggest you check the creating userid on the "offending" records.


If there is some consistency then discuss with the user(s) involved. I
would be looking to see if the user is creating a voucher then enquiring
and using this as a basis for "ADDING" one or more new vouchers - during
this process they be accidentally clearing (field exiting) through the
PI field.

The PI can be changed fairly easily via the speed status change function
or a DWV in update mode.

From memory I think you are correct in that they will not be part of the
same payment group. Also check the selection criteria for the create
payment group to see if PI = *BLANK is included.

Hope all the above helps.

Colin Hugill



Colin Hugill
Consultant
(World A7.3 cum12)

Jeff73,
It's possible that a user used the space bar in the field. There are a few solutions. You can change the UDC so blank (the JDE default value) is not valid. This will stop them during voucher entry. If blank is a valid value for your organization, make sure blank and your other payment instrument type are included in the prepayment selection options. Finally, you could use the speed update program to change the field to the correct pay instrument before running the prepaymant job..

Jeff73 <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi List,My understanding is that the payment instrument field on an AP record (PV) defaults from the vendor master data. However, I sometimes come across different PVs, for the same vendor, most of which have the "right" payment instrument and a few with a blank PI. What could cause this?I believe this will result in these PVs not being part of the same payment group even if everything else is identical (bank account... etc). Is that correct?Thanks,J.
A7.3 Cume 11
--------------------------
To view this thread, go to: http://www.jdelist.com/ubb/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=W&Number=65142

This is the JDELIST World* Mailing List. To stop receiving these messages, login to http://www.jdelist.com/forums, click Control Panel, then click Edit by "Subscribe / Unsubscribe from receiving board posts by email, change message notifications, etc." and adjust your subscription preferences. JDEList is not affiliated with JDEdwards®

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing


World, OW B733X and Xe

You are correct - PV's with a different payment instrument value should end
up in different payment groups. The payment instrument value can be changed
at voucher entry. Payment Instrument value can be changed in Speed Release
also. JDE will default to the vendor master value, but it will let people
override/change the value.

John Dickey
JDE Financial Systems
Administrator/Programmer/Analyst
White-Rodgers, Division of Emerson
St. Louis, MO
314-577-1466

Jeff73,



Mike Dupaix's response contains a very good piece of advice. Think
seriously about changing the UDC values to make BLANK an invalid value.
Make sure you setup an appropriate payment instrument etc. Most of my
clients have adopted this approach in the past if they have more than
one payment method (Cheque, T/T, EFT etc). Sure stops a lot of user
confusion to say the least.



You can use WW in update mode to "fix" all open F0411 records and
supplier master details F0401. But check the supplier master aspect
carefully 'coz it might be stored in one of the F01xx files. I am
between clients (that is - waiting on a new assignment to come up) so I
don't have access to the software to check for you. I know I went
through this process some years ago for a site using A7.1 and had no
problems once I did some proper in-depth analysis.



For a complete changeover including paid items, then you need careful
analysis of the other F04xx files (F0413, F0414, F0415 from memory).



Colin





Colin Hugill
Consultant
(World A7.3 cum12)

Re: RE: Payment Instrument

Thank you guys so much.

It looks like the user is so fast matching vouchers that she must be mistakeny blanking out the PI field... I liked the idea of removing blank from the UDC table as Mike suggested, but it turns out one of our European companies is using blanks as valid values...

Thanks again,
J.