Received but not Invoiced report out of balance with GL

Yahoo Archive
1
Below are the steps I use if there is a discrepancy between the report and the gl. You will need to export both the general ledger and wip report to excel before beginning.

Balancing AP Clearing GL with report

1. Verify that all AP batches are posted.

2. Compare prior month's report with current report.

a. Highlight dropped items on old report. Delete from gl.

b. Cross out old items still on new report - as there will be no transactions for them in the gl or wip.

3. New items on current report should be deleted from wip detail.

4. Compare what is left in the gl to the wip detail.


Christy J. Morris
Controller
Cold Jet, LLC
455 Wards Corner Road
Loveland, Ohio 45140
USA

+1 513-716-6370
+1 513-576-8986 (fax)
www.coldjet.com<http://www.coldjet.com>

[cid:image001.jpg@01CC3BC7.F6C50720]
Setting industry standards in dry ice technology and solutions for over 20 years.

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Hager
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 9:58 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Received but not Invoiced report out of balance with GL



I actually found quite by accident, while investigating an expense
account with an unusually high balance, a receipt that was input for a
software subscription after AP had already vouched the invoice in
Invoice Entry - not Invoice/Receipt match. That receipt did not appear
on the GRNI report but did hit the GL. It was within a few dollars of
my discrepancy.

If this had been a smaller amount, I never would have found it. Thus my
wish to be able to do something with the GL transactions be able to look
for discrepancies by PO or vendor. I wonder if the GL posting rules can
be changed to include more useful information in the descriptive fields.
I seem to recall while we were training for the implementation, that it
is possible but not something I would try myself.

Tim Hager

Controller

Diba Industries, Inc.

tim.hager@...<mailto:tim.hager%40dibaind.com> <mailto:tim.hager@...<mailto:tim.hager%40dibaind.com>>

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
Of Gary Parfrey
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 6:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Received but not Invoiced report out of
balance with GL

Do you have any invoices that have matched lines that are not yet
posted?

The receipt line gets removed from the report when it is matched, but
the GRNI value only gets removed when the invoice is posted.
So if you do have matched unposted invoices, it will create difference
on our GRNI report vs your balance sheet

If this is your problem, wither delete the matched lines or write a
report that excludes only matched posted invoice lines rather than just
matched

Gary

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of P
Sent: 05 July 2011 05:10
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Received but not Invoiced report out of balance
with GL

We have this issue too and would be interested in a solution.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Tim Hager"
<tim.hager@...<mailto:tim.hager@...>> wrote:
>
> Since we went live on 1/1/2011 with 9.04.506C, the Received but Not
> Invoiced(RNI) report has always been slightly off from the GL.
However,
> this month it is a material difference. Has anyone come up with a
> practical way to compare the activity in the GL with the differences
> between two RNI reports?
>
>
>
> The GL chart tracker produces a concatenated field showing the invoice
> and the supplier name for the AP activity. The receiving activity has
> no detail and has to be picked up from the WIP reconciliation report
> which of course gives you a concatenated field with the supplier code
> and the packing slip number. Nothing gives you PO number as far as I
> can see.
>
>
>
> I want to find this difference which I suspect is caused by a unit of
> measure problem but it's difficult to wade through 3000 plus lines of
GL
> entries when nothing is readily matchable. Has anyone else come up
with
> a solution to this problem?
>
>
>
> Tim Hager
>
> Controller
>
> Diba Industries Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ********************************************************
>
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity
to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this
transmission in
> error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this
e-mail.
> E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
> information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive
late or
> incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or
omissions
> in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
> version.
>
> ********************************************************
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

********************************************************

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this transmission in
error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive late or
incomplete, or contain viruses.
The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
version.

********************************************************

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Since we went live on 1/1/2011 with 9.04.506C, the Received but Not
Invoiced(RNI) report has always been slightly off from the GL. However,
this month it is a material difference. Has anyone come up with a
practical way to compare the activity in the GL with the differences
between two RNI reports?



The GL chart tracker produces a concatenated field showing the invoice
and the supplier name for the AP activity. The receiving activity has
no detail and has to be picked up from the WIP reconciliation report
which of course gives you a concatenated field with the supplier code
and the packing slip number. Nothing gives you PO number as far as I
can see.



I want to find this difference which I suspect is caused by a unit of
measure problem but it's difficult to wade through 3000 plus lines of GL
entries when nothing is readily matchable. Has anyone else come up with
a solution to this problem?



Tim Hager

Controller

Diba Industries Inc.







********************************************************

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this transmission in
error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive late or
incomplete, or contain viruses.
The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
version.

********************************************************


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
3
We have this issue too and would be interested in a solution.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Hager" <tim.hager@...> wrote:
>
> Since we went live on 1/1/2011 with 9.04.506C, the Received but Not
> Invoiced(RNI) report has always been slightly off from the GL. However,
> this month it is a material difference. Has anyone come up with a
> practical way to compare the activity in the GL with the differences
> between two RNI reports?
>
>
>
> The GL chart tracker produces a concatenated field showing the invoice
> and the supplier name for the AP activity. The receiving activity has
> no detail and has to be picked up from the WIP reconciliation report
> which of course gives you a concatenated field with the supplier code
> and the packing slip number. Nothing gives you PO number as far as I
> can see.
>
>
>
> I want to find this difference which I suspect is caused by a unit of
> measure problem but it's difficult to wade through 3000 plus lines of GL
> entries when nothing is readily matchable. Has anyone else come up with
> a solution to this problem?
>
>
>
> Tim Hager
>
> Controller
>
> Diba Industries Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ********************************************************
>
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this transmission in
> error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
> E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
> information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive late or
> incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
> in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
> version.
>
> ********************************************************
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
4
Do you have any invoices that have matched lines that are not yet posted?

The receipt line gets removed from the report when it is matched, but the GRNI value only gets removed when the invoice is posted.
So if you do have matched unposted invoices, it will create difference on our GRNI report vs your balance sheet

If this is your problem, wither delete the matched lines or write a report that excludes only matched posted invoice lines rather than just matched

Gary

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of P
Sent: 05 July 2011 05:10
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Received but not Invoiced report out of balance with GL



We have this issue too and would be interested in a solution.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Tim Hager" <tim.hager@...<mailto:tim.hager@...>> wrote:
>
> Since we went live on 1/1/2011 with 9.04.506C, the Received but Not
> Invoiced(RNI) report has always been slightly off from the GL. However,
> this month it is a material difference. Has anyone come up with a
> practical way to compare the activity in the GL with the differences
> between two RNI reports?
>
>
>
> The GL chart tracker produces a concatenated field showing the invoice
> and the supplier name for the AP activity. The receiving activity has
> no detail and has to be picked up from the WIP reconciliation report
> which of course gives you a concatenated field with the supplier code
> and the packing slip number. Nothing gives you PO number as far as I
> can see.
>
>
>
> I want to find this difference which I suspect is caused by a unit of
> measure problem but it's difficult to wade through 3000 plus lines of GL
> entries when nothing is readily matchable. Has anyone else come up with
> a solution to this problem?
>
>
>
> Tim Hager
>
> Controller
>
> Diba Industries Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ********************************************************
>
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this transmission in
> error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
> E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
> information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive late or
> incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
> in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
> version.
>
> ********************************************************
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
5
I actually found quite by accident, while investigating an expense
account with an unusually high balance, a receipt that was input for a
software subscription after AP had already vouched the invoice in
Invoice Entry - not Invoice/Receipt match. That receipt did not appear
on the GRNI report but did hit the GL. It was within a few dollars of
my discrepancy.



If this had been a smaller amount, I never would have found it. Thus my
wish to be able to do something with the GL transactions be able to look
for discrepancies by PO or vendor. I wonder if the GL posting rules can
be changed to include more useful information in the descriptive fields.
I seem to recall while we were training for the implementation, that it
is possible but not something I would try myself.



Tim Hager

Controller

Diba Industries, Inc.

tim.hager@... <mailto:tim.hager@...>











From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Gary Parfrey
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 6:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Re: Received but not Invoiced report out of
balance with GL





Do you have any invoices that have matched lines that are not yet
posted?

The receipt line gets removed from the report when it is matched, but
the GRNI value only gets removed when the invoice is posted.
So if you do have matched unposted invoices, it will create difference
on our GRNI report vs your balance sheet

If this is your problem, wither delete the matched lines or write a
report that excludes only matched posted invoice lines rather than just
matched

Gary

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf Of P
Sent: 05 July 2011 05:10
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Received but not Invoiced report out of balance
with GL

We have this issue too and would be interested in a solution.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>, "Tim Hager"
<tim.hager@...<mailto:tim.hager@...>> wrote:
>
> Since we went live on 1/1/2011 with 9.04.506C, the Received but Not
> Invoiced(RNI) report has always been slightly off from the GL.
However,
> this month it is a material difference. Has anyone come up with a
> practical way to compare the activity in the GL with the differences
> between two RNI reports?
>
>
>
> The GL chart tracker produces a concatenated field showing the invoice
> and the supplier name for the AP activity. The receiving activity has
> no detail and has to be picked up from the WIP reconciliation report
> which of course gives you a concatenated field with the supplier code
> and the packing slip number. Nothing gives you PO number as far as I
> can see.
>
>
>
> I want to find this difference which I suspect is caused by a unit of
> measure problem but it's difficult to wade through 3000 plus lines of
GL
> entries when nothing is readily matchable. Has anyone else come up
with
> a solution to this problem?
>
>
>
> Tim Hager
>
> Controller
>
> Diba Industries Inc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ********************************************************
>
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity
to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
> copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this
transmission in
> error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this
e-mail.
> E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
> information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive
late or
> incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or
omissions
> in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
> version.
>
> ********************************************************
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



********************************************************

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this transmission in
error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive late or
incomplete, or contain viruses.
The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
version.

********************************************************


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]