Moneydance+ serious issues
Let me acknowledge up front that this is likely to end up with Infinite Kind pointing to my bank or to Plaid... or Plaid pointing to my bank or IK... or my bank pointing to IK or Plaid... plenty of cooks in this kitchen.
I will describe my latest issue which, IMO, points out something fundamentally wrong with the system.
I download from my bank account and get one new record.
I download again and get no new records (expected).
I change the date on the downloaded transaction, download again, and get that same record again (NOT expected).
IMO it is ludicrous that this system uses a date on the transaction within MD to determine if that transaction has already been downloaded. There "has to be" unique and immutable transaction identifiers... we are dealing with banks and money here... PLEASE tell me this is so!
While I am here let me comment on another issue I have since using Moneydance+. I often end up merging downloaded transactions with transactions in my register that have a date earlier than the bank posting date of the downloaded transaction. This earlier date is the date I want in the ledger in MD (e.g. the date written on a check) - If I want to I can always see the posting date by using "Show Transaction Details."
Prior to MD+, during reconciliation the system would correctly use the posting date to determine which transactions had cleared.
With MD+ (or the newer version of MD that includes MD+) this no longer works correctly. It uses the date showing in MD and reconciliation has turned into a nightmare. I understand I can configure MD to reset the date to the posting date when merging... but I do not want to do that.
I am curious is this is a flaw with how MD+ transactions are merged of if core MD was recently modified.
Oh, and if it turns out that nothing has changed in this area then I can only blame "Murphy" since I never had this issue prior to using MD+ and I have always dated transactions according to the date "written on the check" or the date I used my credit card... not the ultimate posting date.
Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.
Keyboard shortcuts
Generic
| ? | Show this help |
|---|---|
| ESC | Blurs the current field |
Comment Form
| r | Focus the comment reply box |
|---|---|
| ^ + ↩ | Submit the comment |
You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac
1 Posted by dtd on 22 Feb, 2022 01:01 AM
just a user - I can't speak to MD+, as I prefer to stick with OFX as long as possible. I have signed up for MD+ for the very few accounts that don't download OFX.
As to your first major item - date has nothing to do with downloading. Note I will be going the OFX route explanation. Someone else or you can examine MD+ downloads.
From a thread about Aug 2020:
OFX/QFX files should contain a "Unique Transaction ID" (FITID) for each transaction. Moneydance uses this ID to prevent duplicates. ... This is the bit you can use to compare transactions that duplicate with ones that don't.
You can see this by right clicking on the transaction, clicking "show transaction details".
Normally, if you change the date, you shouldn't get the download again - definitely not by changing the date. However, some banks (and as I said earlier - I don't know about MD+) DO occasionally change the FITID (why? i have no idea, the whole point is it is supposed to be unique).
You can look over this yourself to see if the FITID's change.
There is also a parameter of how many dates the transaction can be off what you entered. Especially if you have an exact same amount/payee - this can be a problem, or a help.
As to your posting date question - it works for me with OFX, and I do very few MD+ downloads - so I may not have noticed your issue.
Hope that gives you a direction.
2 Posted by kenny on 22 Feb, 2022 01:39 PM
Correct. I never had an issue with "pre MD+" (i.e. OFX I assume). I was "pushed" into MD+ primarily due to the bombshell USAA dropped on all of us a little over a year ago. I know there were some "home grown" solutions in place, but when I tried I ran into issues... then I read that some of those issues were out of "our" control and due to issues with the bank itself... do not recall details at the moment. I kept holding out for an "official" solution from IK and guess have assumed MD+ was just that. For quite a few months I exported from USAA and imported into MD and also did not have this issue. That process was tedious and therefore, when MD+ appeared, I jumped at it.
3 Posted by Dan P on 22 Feb, 2022 02:43 PM
My 2 cents.
I changed the date on a reconciled bank transaction and did a new download and nothing changed. The log shows MD+ eliminated 1 duplicate from 1 downloaded.
Changed the transaction from Cleared to UnCleard and downloaded again. Still, 1 was eliminated from 1 downloaded.
I did notice that in the OFX download, there is a tag FITID which is the unique identifier from the bank (FI). On the MD+ transaction details, there is a different tag, fitxnid, which is completely different from what the bank has. But it appears to me to be unique.
Windows 10, MD latest preview build 2022.3
4 Posted by dtd on 22 Feb, 2022 06:46 PM
Well, since I was the documenter of the "home grown fixes", I'll just say that the solution is now in Toolbox, endorsed by Moneydance, and is simple to use.
And yes, things like USAA doubling credit card transactions, having different FITIDs, etc. are out of Md's control. Appears you are running into the same issue with MD+ and USAA, which is what those who installed the "home grown fix" have encountered for months.
As for your exporting from USAA and importing to MD, I assume you used CSV, as that is the only thing USAA offers "by hand". If, so, that is indeed tedious, and why Stuart created the fix a year ago.
5 Posted by kenny on 23 Feb, 2022 02:38 PM
Correct on my interactions with USAA... CSV... tedious... :)
I probably should have said that when I changed the date of the downloaded transaction, triggering the same transaction being downloaded again, I changed the date to a bit more than a month earlier that the bank posting date... since that was the date of the original check itself. Maybe making it that old plays into this issue for me.
Might look into Toolbox... it has saved my bacon in the past... MD+ has been convenient for some of my other accounts... just need to reset it occasionally when I notice a transaction I expected never came down. Again, seems like something missing but maybe that also falls back onto USAA... though I think I've had that issue (needing to reset sync to get an older transaction that was missed) with more than just USAA.
Any comments on my issues regarding reconciliation since using MD+? Does / did MD use a "hidden" bank posting date for reconciliation purposes that might have been overlooked when added transactions originating from MD+?
6 Posted by Dan P on 23 Feb, 2022 05:11 PM
I haven't tested this but you might look at "Preferences, Network' There is an option to set the number of days for matching downloaded transactions. If you've back-dated more than that value, it may be the problem.
Just a thought.
7 Posted by dtd on 23 Feb, 2022 10:37 PM
Just a user… there is a hidden “fitid” value (unique transaction Id,) that you can see by right clicking the transaction as I indicated earlier.
Given your moved it a month statement, that’s almost certainly why it downloaded the transaction again, as even with the fitid it didn’t find the matching fitid as it was not in range.
As Dan p said, there is a setting on how far to look.
8 Posted by kenny on 24 Feb, 2022 01:29 AM
Thanks for the feedback here. It has been helpful.
I had already tried playing with the "Only match downloaded transactions when they are at most nn days apart." 30 days was the max I could select. It is an odd dropdown that doesn't allow me to enter a specific number. Not sure why something like that would be limited to discreet values. Also, not sure why something that says it is used to match transactions would be used to decide whether or not to add a duplicate transaction. Yes, duplicate since the "ol_fitid_1" field does appear to be unique. If it in truly a unique Id meant to identify a downloaded transaction, why isn't it "consulted" before deciding to add a duplicate?
All pretty much rhetorical questions. I have been in the software business for more than half a century so I do appreciate the challenges involved here.
Again, I really appreciate the feedback. It has been informative... I just hope I haven't come off sounding too critical.
9 Posted by Stuart Beesley ... on 24 Feb, 2022 08:44 AM
With MD closed, you could experiment with manually editing config.dict and searching for the "net.downloaded_txn_date_window" key... change it to something else, save and then relaunch MD.. Of course, re-entering the Preferences GUI might destroy this setting if it's dropdown max is 30, but you could still experiment with whether it actually works...
10 Posted by Dan P on 24 Feb, 2022 01:22 PM
Which version of MD are you using? Mac or Windows?
In my preferences, I can set the txn match date up to 90 days.
MD Build 4063, Windows
11 Posted by Stuart Beesley ... on 24 Feb, 2022 01:30 PM
Mac Latest
12 Posted by kenny on 24 Feb, 2022 10:07 PM
Might do the suggested experiment.
The screenshot in the previous posting is pretty much what I see on my Mac... 30 day value cut off and, seemingly, largest value available.
But, irregardless of date ranges used to bracket transactions for merging, I am still curious why MD simply does not add a record if another record with the same fitid already exists... assuming that ID uniquely represents the record at my bank.
System closed this discussion on 26 May, 2022 10:10 PM.