I am not sure I am not remembering this correctly, but it appears the Account Name column is not populated when I display the cleared balances from Bank and Cash accounts page for Inter Account Transfers. Program version 21.10.23, Windows Desktop. Am I not remembering this right?
I am not sure what you are remembering. But the
Account column is only for accounts to which transactions are posted, either balance sheet accounts or income statement accounts. When you are looking at the page shown in your screen shot, you are drilling down on transactions in a specific cash or bank account. So there is no other account to show. The corresponding balance sheet account would be a control account, either Cash at bank or Cash on hand. And there would be no purpose to showing that, as it is less information than you already know by having drilled down on the balance of a subsidiary bank or cash account. That might sound confusing. Saying it another way, if there were anything in that field, it would be the name of the bank or cash account whose balance you are drilling down on, shown over and over.
Okay, thanks. I just thought that the opposing from/to account on the transfer had shown there at one point.
No, I believe you are thinking of the Inter Account Transfers tab, where
Paid from and
Received in show for each transfer. When you are looking at cleared balances for a bank account, you are looking only at the ledger of postings to that account, which actually do not include bank account identification, and certainly nothing about the opposite leg of a transfer, because that opposite leg does not affect the account you are looking at.
I think that showing the oposing account from which the transfer was made (or into) is a valid feature request. Added to
Not sure if this is related or if there is another topic for this, but when we drill down from Bank and Cash Accounts, for example on Unallocated Payments, it would be great to know on which bank account you have made the drill down:
I am not sure what benefit you would get from this. The only way a transaction ends up in
Uncategorized payments is when there is no target posting account for a line item. Its presence in this classification has nothing to do with which cash or bank account is involved. And the only way to fix it is to edit the transaction and select a posting account (not a cash or bank account). When you drill down on any other column entry, the bread crumbs tell you which bank or cash account you are dealing with:
Hi @Tut , thank you for your reply. I am looking to get exactly the benefit you are demonstrating in your image, but for Uncategorized transactions in stead if Pending transactions. I don’t use Pending transactions and did not realise that the bread crumbs is doing the job there. But my question then is why is the bread crumbs not showing the bank account for uncategorized transactions. Please let me know if you can replicate this on your side?
p.s. I know why they are not categorised, that is not the issue.
Yes, I can replicate the behavior. That is the way the program is designed. I have never seen the code for the program, but I believe this has to do with the fact the transactions are in Suspense because they are incomplete (because there is no posting account). Therefore, you are relying on a segment of code that bypasses the cash/bank account. This is similar to what you see when importing bank statements or reconciling bank accounts. It is probably the same computer code, used for multiple purposes. So I doubt it will change.
The point remains that the transactions must be fixed to remove them from Suspense. The way to think of it is that you are not looking (in this view) at a list of transactions from a bank or cash account. You are looking at a subset of the transactions in Suspense.
Tut, I understand your reasoning, and I don’t question the design. However, I am requesting consideration for this to be a suggestion, even if it is split into a new suggestion. I understand that the transactions needs to be categorised, I won’t use the term fixed, because nothing is wrong at this point of the process, it simply indicates that there are no valid payment or receipt rules for these transactions, which requires user intervention. When the user creates payment or receipt rules it is a major benefit to understand which bank account these transactions belongs to. The fact that the system allows rules to be setup per bank account supports my reasoning. The subset of transactions you are referring to is defined by the bank account from which the user drills down to see the transactions in suspense.
@lubos Please, give me a minute of your time to indicate if this is possible to do in terms of design?
Account names for inter account transfers are now showing in the latest version (21.11.68)