I am using 3.7. I am applying a payment to an invoice in the cash receipts journal. The invoice is for $100 (but has 5% discount if paid within 30 days). So the customer sent us $95. The pmt. discount due date on the customer ledger entry is 1/13/04. The Customer postmarked their check on 1/10/04. If I post the $95 payment today (“Posting Date” = 1/14/04, “Document Date” = 1/10/04), Navision 3.7 does not recognize that the payment was made before the pmt. discount date (i.e. 1/10/04 < 1/13/04). Hence, the customer still shows a $5 open balance. Basically, 3.7 is using “Posting Date” to make the decision whether or not to allow a payment discount. According to documentation, 3.7 should be basing this decision using “Document Date”. Has anyone else run into this problem? Is there something in my setup I have overlooked? Please advise. -g
hmm, I just had a client report the same thing. My first analysis 9though not very deep yet), is that users are expected to use the new deposits function, which does correctly calculate the discounts.
Where is the new deposits function? I can’t see anything like what you are describing in Sales & Receivables. We have, what I would say is, a very basic installation. Is this a granule that I need to buy? To answer my own question, I don’t think I should have to buy any more granules. As far as I am concerned, the behaviour I am seeing does not follow the published documentation. Push F1 on the Document Date field (from the Cash Receipts Journal) and see that the Document Date is supposed to trigger whether or not a discount is granted, not the Posting Date.
The document date in the journal line does not determine if there is to be a payment discount, the posting date determines this, whether this is the best way is open to discussion, but this is how it has always worked in Navision. The document date on the journal line is used in exactly the same way as document date on an order or invoice header, that is, it calculate a due date and payment discount date based on payment terms. This is used if posting for example an invoice as a journal. Once you get to posting the Cash Receipt journal the document date does not any real function. Cheers Peter
Hi Peter, I think you missed the issue. The reported issue is that the Payment discount is calculating from posting date on the Posted Invoice (quite obviuosly not the journal line), and that this is particular to 3.70. I have not checked it my self, I only heard it from a client on Monday, and now here 2 days later. I’ll need to check for myself. By the way, there is no no issue that payment terms are always calculated as a function by document date. It was originally calculated from posting date, but was changed to Document date in version 3.55 (DOS). Nav 356, deposits are on the general ledger menu.
Sorry, I was reading the problem as applying an invoice to a payment in the Cash Receipts Journal and then using the document date there to determine that the discount payment falls within the date parameter. I have tested a number of posted invoices to see whether the document date is being used for payment discount calculation and it seems to be doing it all OK.
I’m an idiot. Deposits is right there, plain as day, on G/L. We’ll try it out. FYI … Here’s the test case I did in CRONUS 3.7: 1. Make 3 invoices posted on 1/JAN/04 with 1M(8D) payment terms. 2. Pay the 1st invoice Posting Date = Doc. Date = 9/JAN/04. The payment journal line suggests an amount equal to the invoice amount LESS the potential payment discount. (Just what I expect.) 3. Pay the 2nd invoice Posting Date = Doc. Date = 10/JAN/04. The payment journal line suggested amount is the FULL invoice amount. (Again, what I expect). 4. Pay the 3rd invoice Posting Date = 10/JAN/04, Doc. Date = 9/JAN/04. The payment journal line suggested amount is the FULL invoice amount. (Not what I expect … I expect to see what I saw when paying the 1st invoice). My NSC has agreed that this is a bug, and has contact Navision … we’ll see if it goes very far. According to documentation for the Document Date field in the Gen. Journal Line table, Navision should grant a payment discount based on the date you key into the Doc. Date field … not the Posting Date field.
A work around to get Navision to accept a payment discount is to simply change the payment discount date in the customer ledger entry table. This field is editable (along with due date and a couple of others). I am interested in hearing what MBS said about the document date versus the posting date driving the payment discount date on cash receipts. I always thought it was the posting date, but the document date would be more logical.
I recently responded to a similar situation where a client said the discounts were not being " taken " when allocating cash. The problem was simply that their user had not set the cursor on the cash line when posting. Unless the cursor is pointing to the cash entry, the discount is omitted and left on the ledger as a debt. Just thought I’d mention it but probably not that simple ?
I just faced this very same issue and the logic is still the same in 4.0 and 4.0 SP1. On a Cash Receipt Journal, the Posting Date of the Payment is used to determine whether or not a Payment Discount should be granted (by comparing this date to the Payment Discount Date on the Customer Ledger Entry representing the Invoice being payed). I just finished re-reading all the documentation I could find about Payment Discounts and they all in fact correctly state that Posting Date - not Document Date - is the one being considered.
The document date in the journal line does not determine if there is to be a payment discount, the posting date determines this, whether this is the best way is open to discussion, but this is how it has always worked in Navision.
Originally posted by Peter White - 2004 Jan 16 : 01:26:48
That’s exactly the discussion I’d like to have now. Is there any blatantly obvious reason why Document Date is not used? Something I may be missing? I’m considering changing this behaviour and would like some feedback first. Thanks.
bump  Sorry, just re-bumping the topic.
Last call for comments! Is there really no one out there with some thoughts on the subject?..