Sage 100

AP Check Printing reuses a voided check number in the printing sequence in both v4.40 and 4.50"". I can duplicate this issue with ABC data as well. Next check number for bank is 25. I void and update check number 30. I then create an AP check run for 10 checks. Checks 25-34 print and update rather than 25-29 and 30-35. I can't imagine that this is WAD...am I missing something as far as the way MAS90 SHOULD be working?

I""m guessing it has always been this way and always will be.

It has and it will. You can reuse check numbers over and over to your heart's desire.

Ditto to Robert's comment. MAS distinquishes the reused check numbers via the sequence number field. Not sure what a recommened solution would be be that wouldn't slow down the process. More and more of my clients are using blank check stock (nothing is preprinted). The Crystal form supplies all of the information (need to purchase the Adobe MICR fonts) so they wouldn't know if a check number was previously used or not. Need to develop internal controls to mitigate this. No need for special toner either! Works great when you have multiple bank accounts.

Well, other than making sure the client does not void a check in the middle of a live check sequence, I have submitted a case to Sage to see what their thoughts on this are...if they can provide a business reason why it's programmed this way, I will post their answer.

I guess that is one advantage of having unlimited tech support...............

Sage's business reason will be TLTF...

The answer is that customers wanted to be able to reuse check numbers. i.e. I entered my checks with the right date on the check but I posted them with the wrong date how do I fix it? Reverse the check and reenter it again and post it to the right date. That's just one example.

On this one, I don't really think it is broken per se. The system was designed to be able to drive a MACK truck through the security hole. But what if check # 30 was a valid check pre printed check? The system would skip it and now you five (or more) checks that are off from the MAS number as compared with the preprinted number that the bank is going to use. I can tell you this is a bigger PITA to deal with from a bank reconciliation stand point.

In this particular case, we would want the system to skip over the voided check since it was physically sent out (or lost, or damaged, or whatever) and no longer exists, therefore, that number can no longer be used for a live check run.

My question would be - why is there a check in the middle of a sequence already used? It really doesn't make sense that they would have pulled a check out of the middle. It seems that it would be so rare to have this situation. If they know about this, they should do their check run in two passes. Am I missing something?

Roberta - I totally agree with you and have told the client exactly that in order to avoid this issue in the future. They need to pull the very next available check and then confirm that the ""Next Check Number"" is showing correctly in Bank Code Maintenance. I was just thinking that this was a program issue where the system could not read the Void flag on that check number because why would we want to re-use it, ya know?

I don't think it looks at check history at all in check printing. Not only would it let you reuse a void check it would let you reuse any check number.