Job G/L Journal: Balance Account must be G/L Account

Maybe someone knows the reason why NAV 2009 SP1 when using the Job G/L Journal requires that the Balance Account must be a G/L Account.

Basically what I wanted to do was to use the Job G/L Journal to post misc. costs from my employees such as Road Tolls and Lunch etc. and here using the journal to get the cost both to G/L, the Job and the a Vendor account in name of the Employee.

I know it’s possible to create a Vendor Invoice this way, but I think this is a bit too much for a small cost like this.

Erik, the old trick with single-entry journal does’t work, too? One line for GL Acc & another for Vend, BalAccs empty?

To be honest, I’ve never understood these Acc - BalAcc combination restrictions, if it normally posts with single-entry approach. In addition, many accountants use mostly this method, as they like splitting one Db to many Cr’s or vice versa, attach different Dims (Source Types/Codes…) to both “sides” etc etc

Hi Modris,

Sure, splitting the posts does work fine. And changing the code to allow using the balance account is not difficult either (just two minor removals of the balance account check). My only question is if it does have any unforeseen problems in doing so. Is there any known errors connected to doing this or what?


I’m not very strong in Jobs, so I’ll be only “theoretising” in hope someone more competent will kick in this thread…

You say a small mod can remove the restriction, so I feel MS only follows the style - form (journal, you name it) is created for THIS purpose, so it will be safer to restrict the usage of it for any OTHER purpose, as we ourselves don’t know / aren’t willing to check if this OTHER usage has or has not some side effects, which will crash something in the most unexpected place…

In my programmer’s past I did the same, as 100 developers together can not imagine, what one single user will happen to do - starting from typing cuckoo! in a date field and so on. In such a complex system as Navision it’s easier to maintain stability by means of restrictions -go straight where told, step to the left or step to the right - you’ll be shot [:)]

correction: can not imagine

Yeah, maybe you’re right. Anyway I have removed the two lines of code that do the checks. And it posts fine!

Now I just have to see if I get any errors later.