FDM_P2P_CONFIRM: Something missing in configuration which I don´t know

[Former Member]

Hi all,

First case

I have registered a P2P for the whole amount of an invoice. Then I have accounted a manual payment (F-28) for the total of the invoice. The P2P disappears from the Process Receivables view (I don´t know if this is the standard performance). However, when I enter transaction UDM_DISPUTE to see the case "solved", surprisingly I find the P2P with the state  'Open', and field 'Paid' reflects zero amount.

So, I think it is time for FDM_P2P_CONFIRM. When I execute the program, system shows me the message: There are no promises to pay to be confirmed.

So I am not able to confirm an invoice that is already paid.

Second case

Registration of a P2P, and 2 partial payments so invoice is then manually cleared. Again, P2P disappears from worklist, but looking to the case within UDM_DISPUTE, I see once more the P2P with the state  'Open', and field 'Paid' reflects zero amount.

This time, when I execute in test mode FDM_P2P_CONFIRM, system shows the message:

The promise for invoice 0001 1900009417 2011 001 can be confirmed

Now I execute the program and I find this message: "Process step 013: Change not possible, process step 006 missing"

What have I got to do? Of course all the programs (create worklist, connection to AR, are done previously). Why can´t I confirm in UDM_DISPUTE transaction those 2 P2P, if they are both paid? They still remain as opened...

Thanks for your good help.

[Former Member]

Ok.

I found the solution for the second case: when I run FDM_PROCESS_BUFFER, then I am able to change the state to "Confirm", using FDM_P2P_CONFIRM. This is possible only for 2 or more manua/partial installments done for one invoice which is then cleared through F-32.

About this, just please confirm if it is a normal procedure.

I am still not able to change the state of a P2P to Confirm, when the invoice is manually paid at a time, I mean, fully paid. System does not recognize this and P2P remains with the state "Open" and I cannot change it to confirm.

Has anyone got any hint for this?

Kind regards

[Former Member]

Wilson

I am not sure what you are doing?

Who showed you to run UDM_DISPUTE to see a Promise to Pay? - that is not what it is meant to be used for.

You should use the worklist to view the P2P.

Paying an open P2P should be common - i.e. the promised for date is the 20th June and Payment received the 18th.

[Former Member]

Mark,

It is in fact very simple. If I enter to UDM_DISPUTE transaction, and I change my RMS_ID from UDM_DISPUTE to UDM_COLLECTIONS, I am able to see all my P2P registered within my worklist: 'open', 'kept', 'partially kept' and 'confirmed' P2P.

What I do not like from the worklist is that P2P payed (which as you say is of course very common), disappear from the worklist, at least in my system. The only place I can see confirmed/payed P2P is in this place, through UDM_DISPUTE transaction.

You must remember a P2P is a case running under RMS.

Otherwise, where can I see 'kept' P2P if they disappear from my worklist as soon as they are paid?. In my worklist I only see, 'open' or 'partially kept' or 'broken' P2P, but not 'kept' P2P.

Now, what I want to understand is why a total manual pay of an invoice:

1st. My P2P referred to that invoice disappears completely from my worklist. But if I see the state through UDM_DISPUTE  as I explained before, the state of the P2P is still 'Open'

2nd This state 'Open', although invoice has been paid manually with one single payment, cannot be changed to 'Confirm' with program FDM_P2P_CONFIRM....so P2P remains somewhere still open for ever and I do not know further consequences...

Thanks Mark for your time to clear me standard functioning of all these programs.

[Former Member]

There is standard BI content for this.

I would not recommend you perform the process as you currently have it

Either create an ABAP report, or activate the SAP BI Business content.

[Former Member]

Mark, I beg your pardon but I don´t understand you. What does "standard BI content" stand for? What does it mean?

Do you know if it is a SAP Collection standard performance that 'kept' P2P disappear from my worklist, each time a P2P is fulfilled? Is that Ok?

Could you be more explicit about the process you recomend me, regarding P2P, summarising it? I mean, I can no longer look again through RMS my P2Ps registered, but is it going to be a problem to have open P2P within RMS, when my worklist does not reflect nothing (because P2P has been paid)?

Another question: I do not understand the use of FDM_P2P_CONFIRM, if confirmed P2P do not appear ANYWHERE in the worklist...

As you see, I have several direct questions I raise to you in the understanding that you could provide me a general-simple view wiht just answering the questions.

Thanks, again

[Former Member]

By error, I marked the question as assumed answer, but is not. I am not able to change it now.

How can I modify it?

[Former Member]

Hi Wilson standard BI reports are SAP BW reports (SAP's data warehouse)

Can you confirm the business requirement to view a cleared P2P?

I am very concerned that you do not understand the system or the process, I hope you are not building this for a customer and that you are just playing in a development environment.

[Former Member]

Firstly, there´s nothing further from the truth. I am examining all the possibilities of the system. As I assume you know, P2P can be AS WELL examined through RMS, anything invented through ABAP development, just simple direct customizing and user utilisation.

I found strange not to be able to know which BP has kept how many P2P. But, OK, I deduct from your answer (for is not a direct answer to my question), it is a standard performance of system. OK.

Secondly, what I wanted to know since the beginning of this thread is the utility of FDM_P2P_CONFIRM, apart from confirming P2P, obviously. Is it necessary in an environment in which P2P are going to be used? Or is it enough with the use of FDM_JUDGE? I mean, if CONFIRM P2P are not seen in worklists, I suppose you don´t need to use FDM_P2P_CONFIRM regularly.

Thanks for sending me an answer to the above question.

Kind regards.