Skip to Content
0

KO8G - Settlement of PM Orders: How to avoid message KD538 and related operations

Apr 24 at 12:03 PM

29

avatar image

Hi Experts
I've have the problem described in the Object and i'd like avoid this happens.
The message is issued when you are settling a PM Order already setted for followed periods. I try to explain better my Words:
I my Users settle PM Orders for 2018-01 period, without checking if there're costs collected in previous periods too (i.e. 2017-12). Sometimes few months later they notify a problem that PM Order can't be closed because it settle is not ZERO. Of Course the problem happens because they didn't exec 2017-12 again before running 2018-01.
Now if you run KO8G for 2017-12 again the system issues the error message:
KD538-Settlement before period 01 2018 is only possible after reversal.
So any time is necessary reverse teh settlement of few Orders to Process the missing settlement again.
My idea is checking if there are costs not settled in previous periods, using a badi or a user-exit and issue a Z Message error to avoid the settlement for the attected orders.
Can somebody suggest which badi i can use, and which are the tables to check ??
Thanks for youir help.
Claudio



10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded

Hello Claudio - I don't recommend turning off these error messages; anytime I see a settlement error it is always 100% correct that there is something I should fix.

0

Yes of course, I want symply avoid which my user settle the correct periods one after the othe, for this reason I'd like check it using a badi or an user-exit.

0
* Please Login or Register to Answer, Follow or Comment.

2 Answers

Claudio Carrara Apr 24 at 03:31 PM
0

Hi Paulo
Full-settlement option doesn't work fine on my system. This is because we settle on AuC asset a lot of PM Orders.
If user set TECO status to the Order on 15/01/2018 and my users Run KO8G on 20/01/2018, using 12-2017 as reference an Full serttlement, the system Capitalize AuC on Total asset on 12.2017 even if there's other costs to settle on 01-2018.
This is not permitted by Law in my country, beacuse AuC must be capitalized on final asset only at the End of operations.
Automatic Settlement which I use actually avoid this problem.

Show 2 Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded

Hi Claudio

I think you are confusing two different things such as Type of the settlement rule and Processing mode of the settlement itself. In one case Full refers to the data source selected for settlement, in another case it will determine the receiving object like AuC or the Final Asset. Your original post was not mentioning that you have a CAPEX scenario, so in fact AUC is a special case.

Regards,

Paulo

0

Hi Paulo
I'm sorry but probably I'm explained evil !!
We use PM Order di buid and maintain equiments (palastic moulds)..
By law we have to capitalize the Order cost only when the work is finished.
So because this work is few monts along, when PM order has not TECO status, we settle teh costs on a AuC (temporary) asset. Later when PM is closed we can Capitalize and settle all AuC value + Value not yet settled on Final Asset. Sometimes in January happens that we run KO8G after 20 of month, and if meanwhile the Order has been confimed in January too and set as TECO before run KO8G the final asset is capitalized only for cost collected till December. For this reason in my test I've a problem using Full- settlemnt as run option. I can adopt this solution only if I can avoid the final asset capitalization for a partilal value.
I hope you can understand my expalnation.
Kind regards
Claudio

PS: In the picture enclosed you can see teh PM Order settlemnt rule, and the final asset (2005496/0) and the AuC Asset 91008735/0.auc.jpg

auc.jpg (349.5 kB)
0
Paulo Vitoriano Apr 24 at 12:22 PM
0

Hi Claudio,

I recommend using Full settlement and not the Periodic to avoid that kind of issue.

Regards,

Paulo

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded