Right now, when an expense is submitted, the user fills out the transaction date. Then they submit the expense for approval. When posted to Vista, the transaction date is not going into Vista. Instead, the date of submission for approval maps to Vista's invoice date.
Submission date is a highly arbitrary date. Instead the receipt / transaction date is absolutely the correct field to map to Vista.
This is very important when researching and satisfying audit requests.
This is less of a suggestion and more of an error in my opinion. Please fix ASAP.
Matt Newman
| Company | Alcorn |
| Job Title / Role | Controller |
| I need it... | Yesterday...Come on already |
Dear Viewpoint Suggestion Box contributor;
We at Viewpoint sincerely thank you for your contribution to Suggestion Box on how we can improve Viewpoint products. While we can’t do everything at once, we rely upon your feedback to help guide the prioritization of our product improvements, and Suggestion Box is a critical tool for us to understand and prioritize our customers’ needs.
Viewpoint reviews Suggestion Box regularly for all of our products and updates statuses, adds comments, and performs various house-keeping (including deleting) as needed to ensure that Suggestion Box is maintained as a productive environment for product enhancements requests.
© 2024 Trimble Inc. All Rights Reserved. Viewpoint®, Vista™, Spectrum®, ProContractor™, Jobpac Connect™, Viewpoint Team™, Viewpoint Analytics™, Viewpoint Field View™, Viewpoint Estimating™, Viewpoint For Projects™, Viewpoint HR Management™, Viewpoint Field Management™, Viewpoint Financial Controls™, Vista Field Service™, Spectrum Service Tech™, ViewpointOne™, ProjectSight® and Trimble Construction One™ are trademarks or registered trademarks of Trimble Inc. or its affiliates in the United States and other countries. Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.
This has been set to Likely to implement for more than 2 years? This definitely needs to be corrected.
We are having to import one card at a time and change the date for each - VERY time consuming! Also have to add the description if we want it in Vista. All info is available, it's jut not mapped into Vista. When will this get fixed?
This is still a major issue with using Expenses. Is there a timeframe on changing this?
This does not work effectively right now. We pay way too much money for this not to work.
Please fix ASAP.
We are still unable to use the expense reporting due to several issues. The changing dates for each transaction is difficult and creates duplicates for our users.
More so when the expenses are brought into vista is causing errors with duplicate invoice dates. We have individuals that turn in transactions every day. We approve and pay once a month. When we check all the transactions at one time and create a batch and bring it into Vista , it keeps the various dates and duplicates the invoice number. We want all the transactions to pay on one invoice. Please help with the process.
[cid:image001.png@01D57CFB.30D35750][cid:image002.png@01D57CFB.30D35750]
Hi All,
Thank you for your comments! I like your suggestion to split out the transactions into separate headers in AP Transaction Entry instead of bulking them all together since this would resolve the issue with the transaction date.
I'll bring this up in our next customer review meeting.
We have not began using the Expense piece due to this and other issues. Currently we use the app Expensify and it allows us to combine multiple transaction expenses with various dates and place on one invoice for the one date a month that we reimburse staff. Employees enter transactions as they occur and we combine and pay once a month. This is how we would prefer it to work.
I think your question is moot because I do not think multiple transactions should be grouped together in the first place. I have a different suggestion to that effect.
I believe you are trying to group them together because you believe they ought to be paid together. That is a poor reason, however, since you should let the user decide how they should be paid (together or separate) as part of the AP Workfile process. In other words, you should provide flexibility by starting with trabsactios as being separate.
The other benefit to separating them (other than avoiding your date question) is that we could attach different "underlying" merchants to the AP Header row through a much needed future enhancement. ( No one cares about the employee getting paid, we only care about the underlying merchant for the transaction).
Feel free to give me a call to discuss, this is all very technical.
Hi Matt,
We reviewed this with the team and had a few questions. What should we use if multiple transactions have different transaction dates? Use the max date or the min date?
Thanks for all the great votes on this. We will review in our next meeting.
I agree, this is a major pain point for Expense implementation, and one of the things stopping us from using it.