Skip to main content

We have a situation where, in Aurena, we have to resort to IEE as Aurena does not allow us to complete the task:

  • When we receive a payment from a EU customer, the bank currently charges us a fee which is netted off against the receipt meaning we cannot use the automatic customer offset as the receipt no longer matches the invoices
  • Although there is an allowable difference, we cannot always use this as we may have invoice queries/disputes meaning we often receive payments from customers against later invoices and not the earliest meaning the automatic allocation does not pick up any matching meaning we have to use the manual function which does not allow write offs

In IEE, we can create a new Customer Offset Proposal, select the CUPOA and the invoices to be matched then scroll to write off and enter the amount(s) we wish to write off.

We can allocate in Automatic Transaction Matching however we often receive payment much earlier than the remittance advice meaning we cannot reconcile the bank until the remittance advice is received. 

IFS are aware this is an issue but apparently Aurena “...was designed in a way where most of functionalities can be run in limited number of windows where one window facilitate most of the functionalities rather than maintaining number of windows...”

I know there are many places where Aurena is not as good as IEE but this is a loss of functionality and not just a moan about how IEE is better at certain things.

Hi,

 

From IEE to Aurena, the Customer/ Supplier Offset windows have not been converted as it is.

As you correctly quoted, it is to reduce the number of different clients to do more or less the same thing.

Instead, an additional option called “Manual” has been added to the Offset Proposals in Aurena.

But, there is a limitation in this when handling deviations such as Write-off. This limitation has been there even in Offset Proposals in IEE but not in Customer/Supplier Offset functionality.

 

However, the Mixed Payment functionality can be used to handle the said scenario as a workaround. Since, this is a Bank Charge after all and therefore, no harm creating such transactions under the respective Cash Account (may be I’m wrong here).

So, it would be good to know the consequences/concerns when using mixed payment for this purpose.

Also, it is very interesting see how others handle these type of scenarios at the moment (in Aurena and even in IEE).

These information, would be really helpful to evaluate this requirement for future releases.

 

Thanks and Kind Regards,

Rajith

Afternoon Rajith,

Mixed payment is a solution however if we receive the payment into the bank and do not receive the remittance in a timely manner, we would add the receipt as a Customer Payment on Account (CUPOA) so it shows on the customer statement which creates the situation above. If we can reverse the CUPOA then do a mixed payment, I guess that would be another workaround but not ideal.

Hi,

Yes, you can do the same offset in Mixed Payment together with the Write-offs by adding a zero payment line.

This would be the best available workaround as I can see in the given scenario.

Kind Regards,

Rajith

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings