customer statement doesn’t show customers who opted for cash payment.Any body else experiencing the same?
I can confirm this bug. It also applies to suppliers. I have changed the subject and put this topic into the bugs category.
I think this is still an idea but the idea thread was locked prior to the idea being implemented.
Cash payments / receipts can now be linked to customers / suppliers
Cash payments / receipts have never been linked to accounts payable / receivable or any of the customer / supplier reports
See this post in particular what it does not say Improvement to payment and receipt forms
I indispensably need customer statement as I have tied my loyalty program based on it, so what do you suggest? Shall I continue issuing sales invoice for cash transactions or will things get normal once the bug is fixed?
I locked the thread because it had grown too long and wandering for further usefulness. But a major reason for adding customers/suppliers was to be able to obtain transaction-type statements. I categorize the current behavior as a bug because the program does not report transactions associated with the customer/supplier designated on the statement.
Personally, I would keep doing what you have been until this is fixed. You depend on this information, so you need to keep collecting it in a way you know works. You can always change to non-credit transactions later and skip the invoices. There is no risk in waiting to change, only some frustration.
Thank you @Tut
is there any fast way in which we can change all those already posted cash transactions to credit transactions?
I described using Batch Update to do that in this post: Converting old payers/payees to customers/suppliers.
I don’t consider this a bug.
Currently customer statements show transactions flowing through
Accounts receivable account but cash sales to customers do not flow through this account so they are not visible.
We can show these transactions on customer statement but I wonder what would be the best way.
Show each transaction as 2 lines on customer statement? One for debit, one for credit?
@lubos, you raise an interesting dilemma. The idea that resulted in Payers/Payees being classified as Customers/Suppliers/Others was originally intended to support “the complete history of a customer/supplier in a statement, not just the history for credit sales/purchases.” Users wanted to be able to track every transaction involving a customer or supplier, not just those affecting the Accounts receivable/payable balances.
I think that would be confusing to many. It would look like there were two transactions. And there really are not both a debit and credit to the customer’s or supplier’s account. I think the solution is an additional report. So you would have:
- Customer/Supplier Statement (Unpaid Invoices), with invoice aging just as now
- Customer Account Receivable Report and Supplier Account Payable Report, renamed from the current Transactions reports but covering identical information. This provides a report with current account status.
- Customer/Supplier Transaction History, a new report listing of all transactions, including date, type, and amount during a date range. No opening or closing balances, and no running balance.
Great idea, no need to change the reports that have been working fine for everyone. If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.
Also, may I add that based on what @suraj needs is to know the total sales per customer for his loyalty program.
Based on my experience, this has nothing to do with the collection / receivable statements which are not designed for that. Trying to assess sales from receivable balances is like trying to use a hammer as a wrench.
The answer to @suraj 's problem is “sales by customer report” if it’s in sales receipt, it is a sale and if it’s in an invoice, it is also a sale. That’s what @suraj needs for his loyalty program, not receivable statements.
This is another benefit of what @lubos proposed earlier regarding having customers in the lines of transactions.
Also, it would be useful to be able to switch between cash basis and accrual basis.
That is exactly what I would recommend. And label the entries in accounts receivable / payable something like:
- “Implied invoice”
- “Implied payment” or “Implied receipt”
A “cash” transaction in Manager is when the supplier does not extend credit to the customer. It is equivalent to generating an invoice with zero days payment requirement and the customer paying prior to leaving the counter.
An even more common situation is a physical invoice is generated and supplied however the Manager user enters the data by importing a bank statement and allocating the payment directly to the profit & loss account. An efficient method however if entered fully it would have gone through Accounts payable / receivable.
In either case an invoice could have been entered in Manager with the resulting credit and debit entry.
Manager actually doing that ensures all transactions appear logically together in existing reports independent of what mix of Manager invoices a user chooses to enter.
Expanded on accounts receivable / payable labelling.
@Ealfardan’s comment started me thinking. If customers and suppliers who buy/sell without invoices can’t be incorporated into the broader reporting capabilities of Manager, what was the point of adding them as Payers/Payees anyway? I go back to the words I first wrote when posting the idea and already quoted above: the purpose was to support “…the complete history of a customer/supplier…” Regardless of how they buy or sell, we should be able to extract the same information from the program about them.