Sage 100

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

  • 1.  MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 10:44
      |   view attached
    MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank code was found. - Client has been using this bank for ages to print checks. It is NOT and ACH bank. In the check selection process, electronic payments ""NO"" is selected. Checks are printed. MAS thinks that one (or more) of the vendors should be electronic. Vendors maintenance was verified that electronic is OFF. Still getting error message. KB has help if you really want electronic payments. Is silent on resolving this situation.


  • 2.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 10:52
    must select Pay ACH Vendor by Check in the Selection AND when you go to Check Printing Select CHECKS to pay (not both or ACH).


  • 3.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 10:53
    When you go to print checks check the ""checks"" option on the dialog box that asks ""checks, electronic or both"" type payments. If you don't do that you'll get a ""Bank code XX not setup for ACH"".


  • 4.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 10:54
    Had this twice with an AP ACH customer - I think the above two notes were the solutions both times.


  • 5.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 11:01
    Thanks, Failed to mention that checks only was selected at the check printing prompt. I did verify that all vendors were set to NO for electronic payment in vendor maintenance. Something else is funky. thinking about reinitializing the selection table.


  • 6.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 12:41
    you could pull out the AP_VendorElectronicPayment table and just cross-check against the vendors in the check run, just to make sure nothing is hanging out in that table


  • 7.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 12:47
    Thanks. All vendors were division 99 and there were NO division 99's in that Table. Guess it is time to call Sage.


  • 8.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 14:14
    Any chance someone has put something in Vendor/Customer link maintenance?


  • 9.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-11-2013 18:36
    Called Sage. Scheduled for a call back sometime in the future. The work around for the client was to set up the bank as ACH even though they will never use it. Worked like a charm. Will see what happens when Sage calls. Thanks for all the suggestions.


  • 10.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-12-2013 04:25
    I think approving the bank code for ACH - even though it was not used - was a solution as well. My customer who had this issue used vendors who both received ACH and checks (depending upon the bank account used). So I know you can leave the vendor as an ACH and use different bank codes (both approved and not approved ACH) without an issue. There does seem to be a problem when there is confusion and the customer sets the check writing of a NON ACH approved account to ACH or CHECK and the vendor is set for ACH. Not sure if this is leaving a stray flag somewhere. I've only seen the ""need to turn on ACH approval for this bank code"" one time. The others were solved by using ""print checks only"" type option on check printing.


  • 11.  RE: MAS 90 v4.4.10 - A not approved ACH interface bank

    Posted 07-12-2013 04:43
    Client has been using this bank code for several years now and is quite versed on the process. It just puked yesterday. It would be nice if Sage would provide an elevated hotline number so we don't have to go through the training process for their front line call center folks. Bad enough we have to wait on hold in the queue, then we have to train the kids, then we get scheduled for call back with someone who knows.....