Payment Rules & Receipt Rules now partially broken

1

I’m not sure which version the regression occurred, but sometime recently Payment Rules and Receipt Rules with multiple conditions are no longer matched against uncategorised items:

Manager version (updated today): 22.3.1

Previously this would match a rule if either of the items in the list were a match:

image

However, it no longer does this:

image

If I remove one of them, so that there’s only one option:

image

It now works as intended:

image
image929×202 9.08 KB

This only seems to affect the case where you have multiple descriptions to match on for a given rule.

It was working fine before I updated today to 22.3.1, but I don’t recall which version I was on previously.

2

I doubt that it worked like this :thinking:.

As far as I can remember, bank rules have always been joined with an AND not an OR.

See this guide, specifically:

Enter your search criteria under …and description contains:. This must be a literal string. Multiple criteria can be included by clicking Add line. Multiple criteria are evaluated as a Boolean AND operation, meaning all criteria must be contained in the description.

3

Hmm. I was certain that I’d done at least one transaction import since I combined all of the rules.

That guide does seem to indicate the opposite behaviour, though.

4

The guide as linked by @Ealfardan is clear (I added emphasis where applicable):

Multiple criteria are evaluated as a Boolean AND operation, meaning all criteria must be contained in the description.

So in your example both “Adobe Systems Pty Ltd” AND “ADOBE CREATIVE CLOUD” MUST be contained in the description. So if only “ADOBE CREATIVE CLOUD” but NOT “Adobe Systems Pty Ltd” then it would end up in the suspense account.

5

Yes, I understood it clearly. Thank you for attempting to clarify, however :slight_smile:

If it has always worked this way, then my memory must be faulty. I must have not properly tested last month when I did the previous import.

I went through and separated my rules again, it means the total count increases from 53 to around 90, because my suppliers seem to love changing their transaction names often! But the payment rules are so useful that I don’t mind as long as it works :smiley: Saves a significant amount of time.

Perhaps I should request a feature instead, that we be able to use OR logic in here. If anyone else would find that useful I’m happy to create a separate forum thread with that request.

1 Like