FSCM-COL: Problem on withdrawing a Promise to Pay in Worklist

Hi all,
Iu2019m facing a problem in my Worklist with some Promises to Pay that I created in my development system.
When I try to withdraw it, a message appears indicating u201CAutomatic close status 50 is not validu201D, message number UDM_MSG027.
Now, I have a u201CStatus Profileu201D (in the promise to pay configuration part) that as the status 50 (u201CClosedu201D) and that is assigned to the system status 008 (u201CConfirmedu201D) and event for case u201CCompletedu201D.
I customized also the status 50 as the u201CAutomatic  Status for Promise to Payu201D in:
SPRO => Financial Supply Chain Management > Collections Management >Basic Settings For Collection Management -> Promise To Pay -> Process Integration ->Define Automatic Status Changes
Do you guys have any idea what could be the problem ?
Thans in advance.
Best Regards,
Bruno Sousa

Hi Mark,
Many thanks for your feedback.
Actually, i think that this is a strange situation since after i updated the configuration in:
SPRO=> Financial Supply Chain Management => Collections Management => Basic Settings for Collections Management => Promise to Pay => Create Status Profile
With the following data,
Cde - Status - Sistem Code - System ID
20 - Open/New - 001 - Open/New
30 - In Processing - 002 - In Process
35 - Confirmed  - 008 - Confirmed
40 - Canceled - 009 - Voided/Deleted/Canceled
50 - Closed - 007 - Closed
And also, updating correspondingly in
SPRO=> Financial Supply Chain Management => Collections Management => Basic Settings for Collections Management => Promise to Pay => Process Integration => Define Automatic Status Changes
And changed from 50 to 35, i was able to, in the worklist, to withdraw a promise to pay.
Now, i'm just not totally shore if this configuration is totally correct.
Best Regards,
Bruno Sousa

Similar Messages

  • FSCM-COL: Problems with the Collection Strategy

    Hi,
    We are configuring our collection strategy and we have a collection rule that is based on the following basic rules:
    - BR00000002: Total of All Items Overdue Since n Days
    - BR00000004: Total of All Items Due within n Days
    Now, the problem is that no workist is generated for those rules
    We check the FI-AR system and the customer/business partner does have open invoices that match the conditions that we definined int UDM_STRATEGY transaction for that strategy and collection rule.
    Do you guys have any idea what could be the issue ?
    PS: We are on ECC 6.0 an package level EA-FINSERV => SAPKGPFD10
    Thanks in advance.
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

    Hi Mark,
    Thanks for your feedback.
    The transactional data was transfered from FI-AR with sucess. I was able to check it on table UDM_COLL_ITEM.
    The problem seems actually with those rules....
    For instance, we tried by adding the basic rule BR00000008 to our "Collection Rule" and, afterwards, by adding tou our "Collection Strategy" (on transaction code UDM_STRATEGY) and if we put the condition to catch all amounts the simulation indicates that the worklist will be generated with sucess.
    Thanks in advance for your help.
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

  • FSCM-COL: Problem with basic rules

    Hi,
    We have a business requirement where the basic rules:
    - BR00000002: Total of All Items Overdue Since n Days
    - BR00000004: Total of All Items Due within n Days
    - BR00000019: No Successful Customer Contact in Last n Days
    - BR00000020: Successful Customer Contact in Last n Days
    Where the parameter "NO_OF_DAYS" needs to be able to be selected as a constante (=), greater (>) or less (<) in the collection strategy configuration (Transaction Code UDM_STRATEGY => Conditions)
    I tried to update the configuration of the basic rules (transaction code S_SE3_50000242 and there by changing the info in the "Single field option") but after a few tests i notice that, in spite of the user be able to select if the number of days is greater or not than "x" when i simulate i have no results....
    Do you guys know how is definid the logic of those BADI's (CL_IM_UDM_BR00000002, CL_IM_UDM_BR00000004, CL_IM_UDM_BR00000019, CL_IM_UDM_BR00000020) for these selection options ?
    Does it only allow to be a constant this "NO_OF_DAYS" ?
    Thanks in advance for your inputs.
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

    Hi Deep Patel,
    Many thanks for your inputs.
    Actually here the issue is with the option field "Number of Days" and not the amount (that is available in BR0000002). This option field is defined (as standard) only for a constant (="X" days).
    If we change the option field (for the basic rules BR/02, BR/04,BR/19, BR/20) for being able to be also >, < the system seems to not work correctly...
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

  • Regd.Promise to Pay - Notes POID

    Hi FSCM Gurus,
    This is related to Promise to Pay Case, Notes Field.
    Each case id has one notes field in which any Customer Notes can be stored.
    To save this notes, notes GUID is required.
    Could you please let me know where I can get this, Notes  GUID / SPPOID in relation to the UDM_P2P_ATTR-CASE_GUID?
    I see that if the  UDM_P2P_ATTR-CASE_GUID = 4C2C61825E9252A4E1000000AC1013E2, then the Notes GUID is like 4C2C61835E9252A4E1000000AC1013E2. The change is in the 8th letter in the two GUID's. Here it is 2 in the first GUID and in the next GUID it is 3.
    But couldn't find, where the program is getting it from like a table/view etc.
    Please help me in finding this table.
    Thanks and Regards,
    Dinakaran.R

    Can you please tell us how did you solve the problem.

  • I am unable to generate a Dunning Proposal for Promise to Pay items

    Please advise how or if its even possible to generate a dunning proposal for overdue Promise to Pay items. Currently after debugging I find that the Dunning Proposal filters out any items that are from open promises. Is there a way to generate the dunning proposal for promise to pay items that are overdue? I'm using ECC 6.0 EhP 4.0 PSCD module

    Within SPRO there is some config to define a dunning block for a promise to pay. I would suggest you check here.
    FSCM >> Collections Management >> Int with AR >>  Promise to Pay >> Make settings for Promise to Pay.
    If this does not work, I would assume this is because you are using FI-CA and the config is slightly different.

  • Promise to pay in advanced collections

    Hello,
    We are planning to use the IEX_PROMISES_PUB.INSERT_PROMISE API to create a promise to pay for an invoice. Need help working with it, what parameters to pass and how it will work. Does anybody have a sample on using this API? What is the resource id that needs to be passed?

    Hi Mark,
    Many thanks for your feedback.
    Actually, i think that this is a strange situation since after i updated the configuration in:
    SPRO=> Financial Supply Chain Management => Collections Management => Basic Settings for Collections Management => Promise to Pay => Create Status Profile
    With the following data,
    Cde - Status - Sistem Code - System ID
    20 - Open/New - 001 - Open/New
    30 - In Processing - 002 - In Process
    35 - Confirmed  - 008 - Confirmed
    40 - Canceled - 009 - Voided/Deleted/Canceled
    50 - Closed - 007 - Closed
    And also, updating correspondingly in
    SPRO=> Financial Supply Chain Management => Collections Management => Basic Settings for Collections Management => Promise to Pay => Process Integration => Define Automatic Status Changes
    And changed from 50 to 35, i was able to, in the worklist, to withdraw a promise to pay.
    Now, i'm just not totally shore if this configuration is totally correct.
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

  • FSCM-COL: Worklist functionalities

    Hi all,
    I have another quick question regarding the Worklist functionality that Iu2019m hoping that you guys could clarifyu2026
    In the tab u201CInvoicesu201D I have a couple of fields:
    -u201CPaidu201D u2013 That corresponds to amount paid (Data Element is BDM_PAID_AMOUNT);
    -u201CLast Paymentu201D u2013 That corresponds to the date of last incoming payment for the Invoice (Data Element is FDM_LAST_PAYMENT_DATE);
    Now, Iu2019m facing some problems on understand the functionality of these fieldsu2026 I cleared (totally or partially) some of the invoices that were in the worklist for that business partner but those columns always appear emptyu2026without any values of the payments that i have done for those invoicesu2026
    I try to check the SAP Help but there is no clarification of those columns functionalitiesu2026
    Can you guys help on this ?
    PS: Only FSCM-COL is activeu2026no Dispute Management or Credit Management in use.
    Thanks in advance.
    Bruno Sousa

    Hi Mark,
    Thanks again for your inputs.
    I'm a bit confused.
    I thougt that, after the clearing of the invoice (that is done after the payment, total or partial) the invoice does not appear anymore in "Invoices" tab.
    The only info that is going to appear is the payment document (in "Payments" tab and in "Invoices" tab if the payment was partial).
    If we do a partial payment (or better yet, a partial clearing) the invoice number will not appear in the "Invoices" tab...the only document that is going to appear is for the remain money that it was not paid for the first invoice:
    Example: we have an invoice of 1000 $, and the customer paid 900$. Then this 1000 $ invoice will be cleared but, the payment document will have an open item for the customer of 100$. It will be this document (this payment document) that will appear in the "Invoices" tab...
    So, i don't understand how can that colomn be for the partial payments....
    Thanks again for your help and patiante.
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

  • FSCM-COL program FDM_COLL_SEND_ITEMS checks business partner in KNA1

    We have a requirement to create a Business partner in FSCM-COL without creating any Customer master in FI (KNA1 table).  For each Customer invoice we have populated the Business partner (UDM_BP) in a free field (BSEG table).  Say customer ABC invoice #10000 will have the business partner XYZ assigned in BSEG field XREF1.  XYZ is not created as Customer in KNA1 but is created as Business partner in UDM_BP only. 
    For sending FI-AR data to FSCM, we have changed the BADI logic of determination of Branch/Payer to get the Business partner from BSEG-XREF1 field not from KUNNR.   When FI-AR data is sent to FSCM using the program FDM_COLL_SEND_ITEMS, system checks whether Business partner XYZ is created in KNA1 table.  Is there any way to avoid creating XYZ as Customer in KNA1 since we would be duplicating 5k+ customer records.
    Request your ideas on this.
    Thanks,
    Siva Parvathala

    Hi,
    This is kind of strange as to why you want to do this.  Anyway you have 1 customer in FI-AR for whom you are generating the invoices.  So there is already a customer ABC.  You also have a BP XYZ.  Now why not use the standard itself and link the customer ABC with XYZ which is going to save all the efforts required for custom modifications.  For linking BP and Customer, it is not necessary that both should have the same number range.
    Also I don't think you can do the transfer without linking customer and BP.  Anyway I will check this and let you know.  But I am sure this is redundant work and you can use the standard itself for this.
    Regards,
    Ravi

  • FSCM-COL: Worklist separated by invoices and credit notes

    Hi all,
    We are implementing FSCM-COL and in the u2018Process Receivablesu2019 screen, in the tab "Invoices", there is a split between invoices and credit notes,in two separate lists. The documents are not displayed together!
    As a basic requirement for a collection contact, a single list is required, in order to be possible to sort all open items and enable
    greater efficiency during the customer contact.
    Do you know how this separation is done (by posting key for instance...?) and if we can change this....
    Or this is standard functionality of the worklist ?
    Thanks for your inputs,
    Best Regards,
    Bruno Sousa

    This is standard.
    Credits are normally a different colour.
    The worklist should be used by the team to define what the customers owe's and what they should pay.
    Total overdue - disputed items not resolved = amount to be collected.

  • Batch Input or FM/BAPI - FSCM Promise to Pay

    Hi,
    I would like to know if there is a BAPI or a function to create the promise to pay (FSCM - transaction FDM_COLL01).
    Thank you very much
    Patrizia

    Hi Cristobal,
    thank you very much for information.
    Can you give me an example to apply this function?
    The function is never used in Sap
    Thank you!!

  • Promise to Pay without selecting invoices.

    Dear All,
    I had a question from our business users to see if its possible to create promise to pay for a particular amount, without selecting invoices. Since, they say the customer just promises to pay a particular amount to release the orders that are on hold, and they wont specify the invoices against which the promised payment is for.
    So, just wanted to know if there is any such possibility?
    Thanks in advance.
    Krishna

    Hi Krishna,
    No you can't. In the screen of transaction it is mandatory to assign an invoice. Please, to make sure read the link below:
    Promises to Pay - SAP Collections Management (FIN-FSCM-COL) - SAP Library
    JPA

  • Add Credit Notes to Promise to Pay

    Hi,
    Can somebody tell me how to enhance the badi FDM_P2P_JUDGE to include payments (unallocated) and credit notes?
    At the moment we are not able to add credit notes to a P2P. We are on EHP4 for FSCM
    Thank you
    Richard Gentenaar

    Hi,
    The problem is that it's not P2P is not intended to include random credits. I checked with SAP via OSS credit notes can only be added to the P2P WHEN they are linked in the receivables process. Then this is automatic. Otherwise not so that doesn't help our business case.
    This is the exact answer from SAP:
    Dear Richard,
    it is not intended to include credit notes into promises to pay.
    If an invoice (1000) and a credit memo (500) are marked in process
    receivables, one promise to pay is created (500) for the invoice.
    If a promise to pay already exists for an invoice and a credit memo
    should be considered, the credit memo has to be cleared with the
    incoice.
    Please let me know if you have further questions. If the problem is
    solved, I kindly ask you to close the message by confirming.
    Best regards,
    Development IMS Financials, SAP AG
    I took the name out for privicy reasons
    So that is clear.
    Regards,
    Richard
    Edited by: R. Gentenaar on Aug 25, 2010 3:12 PM
    Edited by: R. Gentenaar on Aug 25, 2010 3:15 PM

  • Promise to pay and payment method

    Hi all,
    The following is the case in Collections Management. When you use the payment method in AR you will find that you will run into problem logging a P2P on items that have a payment method filled in. Now for direct debit it would be under discussion if this is correct or not since a direct debit goes thru F110 however when you have other payment method filled in (like banktranfer, payment by check or BoE) then you have a problem. Personnally i think this is a bug or conflicting functionality so i already discussed this with SAP.
    You can manually bypass the above by setting the payment block on the invoice (from the worklist) but that is a lot of work. Now my question:
    How difficult is it to create a user exit on the BSID table to fill in the payment block on the customers/ company codewith all documents that have a certain payment block?
    I was thinking to use the following variable fields in the UE:
    BSID-BUKRS u2013 Company Code
    BSID-KUNNR u2013 Customer Number
    BSID-ZLSCH u2013 Payment Method
    BSID-ZLSPR u2013 Payment Block
    Does any of you have experience with this, is it possible? Might there be another way?
    Thanks in advance
    Richard

    Hello James,
    Following are the major differences in promise to pay and installment plans
    1)When you create installments, new statistical items are created by the system using the main transaction of installments in the table of open items DFKKOP. However, new statistical items are not created in the case of promise to pay. Just a new promise to pay document is created from where you can see individual items and amount due to date etc
    2)When you create an installment, you have the option of viewing installment amounts in the account balance display or the original document(against which the installment was created). Incase of promise to pay, you cannot see individual promise to pay items in account balance display(FPL9). you only see the original document
    3)When you create an installment against a recievable, the ABWBL field in DFKKOP is updated with the document number of the installment plan created. Same is true for promise to pay documents as well
    4) Installments nt possible for items that have been sent to coll agencies. This is not true for P2P
    In my perspective, installments is a very flexible way of deferring due dates and breaking line items. If you use the functionality for doing it you will have much wider options in terms of clearing control and reporting. However, P2P(as i see it) is just an agreement with consumer and is not as flexible as installments and might make you life a little difficult
    I hope this will help. I'd suggest you also take input from other experts here. Thanks!

  • Create promise to pay button does not appear in UDM_SPECIALIST

    Hi
    In my worklist i have a business partner , that have two invoices overdue. I want to create a promise to pay. I select the business partner line in UDM_Specialist and click on process receivables. The system shows the open items on this business partner.
    However, I do not see the create promise to pay icon in the invoice tab.
    I want to create a promise to pay. May I know what am I missing here?
    Best wishes
    Raj.

    Hi Mark
    Thanks for your response. I checked that the P2P case type is assigned to the company code and also all the settings for promise to pay. Also, i got the relevant roles too.
    It is a bit baffling that the create promise to pay and other icons do not show up in the udm_specialist transaction.........
    someone tells me that it could be because of the current version of SAP GUI for windows that is on my system. Is it true that some older versions of SAP gui (example release 620) have this problem.
    Best wishes
    Raj.

  • Report on Promise to Pay/ Collection History

    Hi, We want a report on promise to pay(how many promises were kep, broken etc) to determine collection history.
    Should we just have a query on UDM_P2P_ATTR table or there are more details which we can get. Can we get promise to pay and agent who contacted the customer for that particular promise to pay on the same report.

    Nik,
    There is some great business content available in BW past Enhancement Pack 4
    If you want to write your own reports there are a few things to consider.
    Do you want to report what someone has done today in terms of actions - so amount promised today, or do you want to report on the amount promised FOR today.
    Lastly to monitor performance you might want to compare successful and unsuccesful contact, as well as the outcomes, so number of P2P's, disputes, notes etc.
    Please e mail me as I may have some suitable reports for you..
    Edited by: Mark Chalfen on Feb 20, 2012 12:37 PM

Maybe you are looking for