Reconciling Transactions in MD2011
I am starting this thread to basically continue the lengthy discussions that have been had over the last couple of years at this link:
http://help.infinitekind.com/discussions/md2010-beta/7-reconciling-...
We were requested to close that thread (it has gotten very long), and start a new one, so here it is. I am posting a link in that discussion to reference this one.
I updated to the latest build (780) from this link:
http://moneydance.com/tmp/daily/installers/780/installers/
note: these are daily builds and I don't think they are guaranteed to be stable.
I was pleased to see that the relabeling of one of the fields on the side bar in the new reconcile screen had indeed been made. Instead of "Potential duplicates", now the field is labeled "Merge Choices".
The top field labeled "Edited Transaction" is still troubling to me (as it has been to others in the old thread). Maybe it needs relabeling as well to more accurately express the intention. I first thought of "Editable Transaction", but notice that the "Similar Payees" also contains editable fields. I also thought of "Best Payee", but I am not sure that is the intention.
Hopefully, the MD staff will see this, and better explain what the intent of the "Edited Transaction" field is, and what sets it apart from the "Similar Payee" list.
Showing the most recent page of comments. View the first page
32 Posted by davet65 on 26 May, 2011 02:04 PM
As a follow-up to my earlier post #30:
Is it possible that I edited a Similar Payee transaction listing in the matching sidebar, and instead of changing the downloaded transaction, MD changed the original Similar Payee transaction? That shouldn't be the case, but it is the only thing I can think of that would do what I described.
33 Posted by davet65 on 28 May, 2011 03:33 PM
I'm still hoping to get a response from staff to this issue. There is a related new post in Problems that MD was offering Cleared transactions as Merge candidates. Cleared transactions should be off limits [unless manually "uncleared"] to merging or modification in the matching/reconciling process.
34 Posted by Karen on 28 May, 2011 04:01 PM
I wish there was a way to turn off "merge" altogether. I don't pre-enter, so I always have to edit the transaction to get the right category or payee. So much wasted time. This particular "feature" of MD seems counterintuitive.
35 Posted by davet65 on 28 May, 2011 04:32 PM
I disagree with Karen. I don't pre-enter credit card transactions, but DO pre-enter virtually all of my banking transactions, so Merge is important to me. I just want it to work right!
As a new convert to MD from QMac2006, I like MD for the most part, and am glad I made the switch, but I had very few problems with Q's matching process for downloaded transactions, so it can be done.
36 Posted by james f on 28 May, 2011 04:33 PM
Karen,
It would save you a lot of time and effort editing transactions if you were to "pre-enter" transactions into Moneydance as you go along. Then, after you download your transactions, manually use the "merge" feature instead of the "confirm" feature.
I have yet to run across any category and/or payee mistakes this way, and I've been using Moneydance since 2002.
37 Posted by james f on 28 May, 2011 04:39 PM
The manual "merge" feature ought not be changing categories and/or payees in "pre-entered" transactions. I have never encountered arbitrary changes to categories and/or payees using the manual "merge" feature in the nine years that I have been using Moneydance.
38 Posted by azguy6 on 28 May, 2011 04:52 PM
I pre enter everything And use the merge feature to just make sure everything has cleared and that I've tracked everything. With 790 the merge feature isn't working right but I am hoping that gets fixed with an update soon.
Sent from my Verizon iPhone
39 Posted by azguy6 on 08 Jun, 2011 01:54 AM
Hey Ben - regarding post #21 - is this a fix that will be coming soon? I am still seeing the issue in build 791.
Thanks
40 Posted by Ray J on 18 Jun, 2011 12:27 PM
Further to my post 17 above - having now been using MD2011 for a couple of weeks, I am happy to withdraw my comment about lack of MEMO in matching screen. As it is visible as a "hover tip", I can still see the information I need.
Support Staff 41 Posted by Ben Spencer on 19 Jun, 2011 09:57 AM
azguy6
With regard to post #21 I had a lengthy discussion with the developers and they tell me that they are inclined to not re-enable the "Automatically merge downloaded transactions" option or at the very least make it a hidden option for those users who are currently using it an wish to continue using it.
I would very much like to hear from the contributors to this thread what they think of this proposition.
To clarify the option File->Preferences->Network "Automatically merge downloaded transactions" currently is ignored on import/download of transactions.
This option used to be enabled in previous builds. Its functions was to automatically merge potential duplicates and apply repeat payee matches as the translations were imported. Note that this option does change the confirmation panel or the potential duplicates offered there.
The primary problem with the options is that when enabled it can perform a great many matches that will affect the balance of an account and if any of these matches are false positives they can be tricky to track down manually.
So what do you think? Should the option be re-enabled, removed completely or enabled only as a hidden option?
Sincerely
Ben Spencer
Moneydance Support
42 Posted by Randy on 19 Jun, 2011 12:21 PM
I'm ok with leaving it as is. It kind of goes with the current flow. It does make you merge each one individually, but I kind of did that anyway.
The new approach works pretty well, once you get used to it.
43 Posted by azguy6 on 19 Jun, 2011 04:44 PM
Ben-
Just to be clear on how I think it should function, is when transactions are imported, they are automatically "linked" to a pre-existing transaction (if one exists around the same date/amount/etc.). The user will still have the option to accept the merge as correct, or unlink the merge. I do not want MD to ultimately "confirm" any of the matches, I just want it to attempt to put them together and need me to just say yes/no to the match.
I am not sure if you ever used MS Money, but that is how it handed downloaded transactions. If one existed, it linked it to the pre-existing one and gave the user the option to accept as a true match, or unmatch and then it would show up as an additional transaction in the register.
With the process now where it adds all the transactions as additional lines in the register, if you only do this once a month, it could make it more of a daunting tasks to go through and match everything up as you may have 50-75 now duplicate transactions in your register that have to be reviewed individually. If MD had matched them to the ones that had the same date/amount/etc, the user may only have a handful that need extra attention.
In the end, I have gotten used to the new flow in 791. I don't like it, but since I am downloading/importing multiple times a week its not too many transactions to deal with.
If it was my call, I would prefer not to disable it at all, but at least make it a user configurable option. I realize that others use the program differently than I do, but I would hate to lose this feature when it had been working perfectly for me before 791.
Thanks
Trevor
44 Posted by davet65 on 19 Jun, 2011 07:30 PM
azguy6 said:
"With the process now where it adds all the transactions as additional lines in the register, "
While all the transactions do show up "in the register", if you choose the split window display, the downloaded but not dealt with transactions are in the lower window, and only appear in the register proper after being accepted by being Merged or Confirmed. I find that acceptable. I personally don't want MD to automatically Merge for the reasons that Ben stated, but have no objection to having a user-selectable mode, hidden or otherwise. What would be a good addition is the ability to force a match that MD for whatever reason didn't find.
And isn't the current Merge function pretty much what azguy6 described for MS Money? The matched downloaded transactions are presented as candidates to Merge, with the other possibilities also listed, and the transactions with no match are presented with identified possibilities.
I guess I am satisfied with the new MD overall process, but I still don't believe it is what it should be for matching. I have commented several times in threads here that MD will present a downloaded transaction as a "new" transaction even though it has been downloaded and matched and reconciled before, even including a matching check number. If a transaction has been accepted by Merge or Confirm, and especially if then Reconciled, that transaction should NOT be presented again. This doesn't happen often, but it DOES happen. Jessica has all the details.
45 Posted by jimmplsmn on 20 Jun, 2011 04:10 AM
Its been so long since I gave up on MSMoney and moved to MD :-) but as I recall, one function I would like is to have (one that MSM did have) would be the ability to pick the correct merge candidate if MD for whatever reason doesn't catch it. It seems that this occurs if two transactions of the same amount appear in the same general time frame. I have been frustrated not having a way to tell MD "no, not that one, THIS one". I would love to have that capability!
46 Posted by Johann Beda on 20 Jun, 2011 11:53 AM
What happens to me occasionally is a cheque takes a long time to be cashed by someone and so it doesn't come up as a merge candidate because the date is so far in the past it is not considered by the algorithm. Right now I have to find the transaction, edit the date to something close, merge that, then re-edit the date back. It would be nice to have the ability to do as jimmplsmn suggests.
47 Posted by -Kevin N. on 20 Jun, 2011 12:30 PM
Hi Johann Beda,
File > Preferences > Network tab, try raising the number in the drop-down list in the 'Only match downloaded transactions when they are at most "X" days apart' option.
HTH -Kevin N.
48 Posted by davet65 on 20 Jun, 2011 01:04 PM
The situation I described at the end of my post #44 - MD keeps presenting previously Merged/Confirmed transactions as new - seems to occur with very old transactions. And I have one charity that regularly keeps the checks more than the maximum of 90 days available in the match days apart Preference. I personally think the max should be 1 year, since the work-around of changing the date suggested in #46 doesn't seem to work for me. When I edit and then re-edit the date, MD doesn't recognize the Merged transaction and presents a "new" one again. (If I leave the date changed to the one MD downloaded, it recognizes that.]
If there was a way to force a match - and make sure MD remembers that match next time it downloads - that would eliminate the problem even though perhaps not addressing the failure to match in the first place.
49 Posted by Johann Beda on 20 Jun, 2011 03:22 PM
Thanks kmnugent, I had forgotten about that setting. Cheques are valid for up to six months as I recall, so even if I went up to 90 days that might not be enough, and could start to generate a lot more false positives. Having an explicit "merge to this transaction" ability would be a very good thing in my mind. I have no idea what the best type of interface might be however.
50 Posted by trillium on 02 Jul, 2011 01:49 AM
I believe I am using the latest (791) build of Moneydance and had hoped that it would resolve an issue that has been frustrating me for years. Why, after I manually enter fields into a downloaded transaction, would Moneydance choose to default to a "Similar Payee" old transaction rather than the one I just typed in? This forces two additional steps for every transaction I want to confirm, instead of simply using control/return to confirm.
Would so appreciate some insight into what is really a big issue for me.