Sage 100

 View Only
  • 1.  Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 10:21
    Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO receipt of goods through the GL, the GL source journal has a completely wrong number - in this case about $2k. If you double click on the entry to see the PO behind it, the amount that should have posted was $17. I've ruled out duplication of the source journal number and from both the PO side and the GL side (except for the number that appears in GL_DetailPosting) it looks correct. Do I just modify the balance in GL_DetailPosting and write if off as a glitch? This is MAS 90 4.3.0.20. Thanks!


  • 2.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 10:23
    A basic question, but are some of the lines misc chg codes that don't go to purchases clearing? They aren't processed until receipt of invoice. Other than that, I've got nuthin'


  • 3.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 10:28
    Thanks for your response! I checked for any non-inventory items and there weren't any. The entire PO only adds up to about $400 so trying to find this $2k is making my brain sputter.


  • 4.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 10:30
    Could this be as simple as a wrong GL setup in a division master file -- maybe someone used the same acct code for DR and CR? Just .02


  • 5.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 11:06
    By ruled out a duplicate source journal number have you opened a General Ledger Detail Report by Source Journal selecting for the problem Source Journal and Register number? Is your General Ledger still in balance? If you are selecting the entry from within the GL Account Maintenance transaction tab we have seen problems with a link to an earlier journal with the same ID. Believe what you see on the GL Detail Report by SJ. I would be careful changing the GL_DetailPosting file using DFDM but would recommend entering an adjusting GL journal to fix. Keep your changes visible and accounted for. That way if someone ever runs the Re-calculate account balance routine your changes are included.


  • 6.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 11:16
    I ran the GL Detail by source and it also shows the $2k number with only the one receipt of goods referenced. This one is a good example because it was the only receipt of goods in the batch and you can clearly see in the PO module how the amount posted should have been $17 but the GL has this $2k number. I will suggest correcting entries to the client but you know the next questions will be 1. How did this happen and 2. How can I identify if it happens again?


  • 7.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 11:28
    Seems like the right time to make sure that the Registers are saved in Paperless Office. That way you could at least review it to answer Question 1.


  • 8.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 13:10
    is the GL in balance?


  • 9.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-06-2012 13:17
    The GL is in balance. This thing just keeps getting weirder. The client had PDFed everything and you can clearly see the PO receipt register with the right number and one minute later the DTR with a completely wrong number. It does seems to only be happening with one vendor, if that means anything...


  • 10.  RE: Has anyone seen this before: When looking at a PO

    Posted 01-09-2012 15:06
    Okay - so we figured this thing out. The inventory item on the receipt of good was Standard valuation. The user had overwritten the cost on the purchase order with something drastically different ($.43 instead of $53.00). When the receipt of goods was preformed, all of the purchase order reports showed the extended cost based on that .43. it was only once it got to the GL that the standard cost came into effect and posted a much larger DR/CR. Sage agreed that it was weird that at no point before that did it indicate which cost it was going to use, but at least we got it figured out and there was logic behind it!