Skip to Content
avatar image
Former Member

Inclusion of line items before previous document due date passed

Hi All,

I am having below mentioned scenario:

1. I am invoicing a consumer in Aug-14 with periodic billing order. Document is having due date of 10-Sep.

2. Further I am doing interim billing and invoicing (before previous document due date expired) with posting date say 05-Sep.

The recent document of 05-Sep is not including all line items of document invoiced in Aug-14.

How do we include Aug-14 bill line items in next invoicing.


Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Get RSS Feed

1 Answer

  • Best Answer
    Sep 08, 2014 at 05:53 PM


    I don't know without looking in detail if it's achievable, but I do know - the requirement must be much more specific than simple "include" on the bill/in invoicing. "Include" as in:

    - include in bill total amount (bill the already billed but not yet due amounts once again, in other words, which IMO opens up a "can of worms", confusion and challenges at the receiving end, when the system has to do electronic bill presentment, but which I've seen practiced at more than one customer), or

    - "include" as in list the open amounts informatively, without including them in the total bill amount, but adding to "account balance" or perhaps the amount payable?



    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Hi,

      If you are not using Integrated Account Maintenance, under "Item Selection for Bill printout (Subitems)" it should be as easy as leaving Open Items Selection restriction blank - meaning "All open items for contract acct (w. and w/o ref. to cntrct)", setting the "Interval days for the due date of items to be printed" to 999, and choosing the "Consider Items in Bill Sum Total" setting - once or always, I believe. If it doesn't work, I'd be looking at FQEVENT R410 FMs to see if the Items are passed that far.

      <rant on>I can't to this day get how come so many Utilities (in my experience - all I've worked with) practice this "double" or even multiple billing of the same amounts (even if the amounts do not multiply in FI-CA postings, you have invoiced the amounts to customer multiple times). Or rather - nobody has been able to tell a valid and irrefutable reason, why things need to be done that way - it's usually "that's how we have always done it" reason. The accounting people don't even care that the previous invoice remains valid in the system (as long as their precious FI-CA postings do not multiply), because there is nothing in IS-U that automatically reverses or invalidates it... And I don't get why the regulators even permit it...<rant off>