The key will be looking at the second line of the authorisers “MORRISR” because the first line is showing as Authorised but the second, not.

In the top, there is a command to go to “Authorisation Details”. Please have a look whether the first line has been set to “Automatically Authorised” - this will confirm whether the company setting has been applied.

I would look at the “Invoice Posting Authorisers” to check what the setup against “MORRISR” is, and what is the authorisation assigning rule that applies to the invoice. Is it applied because that is the invoice recipient, but the user is maybe not in the list of authorisers? Hopefully this helps resolve the issue

Hello

Thank you so much for responding so quickly!

I have checked as you said the Authorisation (see screenshot) I think then the company setting is not applying, have I read that right?

I then double checked the company setting and have screenshot both relevant tabs, am I missing anything as I’m now very confused?

really appreciate any advice.

Many thanks

Sheila

Thanks for the screenshots, it does mean the automatic authorisation has not applied. Could you please check 2 more places:

1. The invoice posting authorisers for that company - to make sure the users mentioned WATTSC and MORRISR are both in that list
2. In the posting proposal of the invoice, check that the posting lines have not been manually modified, because if they have, automatic authorisation will not apply

wow super fast, thank you.

On the posting proposal, no manual changes. 

In regards to the posting authorisers, we have procurement as acknowledgers but I do have every user who can authorise PO in the list for posting authorisers. Do you this this is the issue that we have acknowledgers. All our PO rules have 2 steps 10 Authoriser 20 Acknowledger.

Many thanks

Sheila

Hi Sheila,

Thank you for the screenshots. It does help me understand the issue better and it’s not what I suspected initially.

Is the PO Receipt used in this invoice fully closed, or are there any goods still awaiting inspection results or the putaway is not complete maybe? 

I also noticed there is a 0.01 balance in the accounting currency, do you have it set up to automatically apply tolerance (setting on the company)?

Is this issue only applying to this invoice or to all invoices in the company / with the same authorisers or is it specific to this invoice?

Hi 

Yes with regards to tolerance we have this set.

With regards to PO receipts, we do not do inspections or putting away, we are very simple and receipt by Qty, mainly no part items. 

Many thanks

Just one stupid question - I think automatic/manual authorization switch is present as well in supplier master data, and it can override company setup, is it the case?

If not, this once cent balance in accounting currency may do the difference, as @Ieva Rituma mentioned.

Thanks, Adam. There is no automatic/manual matching setting on the supplier level so I do think it will be the difference that’s causing this issue.

Is this issue only applying to this invoice or to all invoices in the company / with the same authorisers or is it specific to this invoice?

I’m afraid it’s applying to all invoices, i did start with thinking the difference was the issue but we had this previously and the tolerance works and took care of that.

I am very baffled.

Really appreciate your help

Hi Sheila,

I’m sorry to hear you’re facing this issue and I have to say it’s nothing more that I can think of, that could be causing this. My advice would be to raise an IFS support case because support will have access to the databases and if needed, will also be able to do a technical investigation. To save you from answering all the same questions you’ve already done above, I suggest attaching this thread also to the case. 

Again, I’m sorry I was not able to help solve this issue.

Thank you, I really appreciate all the assistance you have given and if anything reassures me that actually I do understand the process and have set it up correctly.

We will raise a case and attach this as recommended.

Thanks again