wrong dimension values on Bal. Account ledger entry?

greys

Hi!

I'm working with Nav5.0. I've made one general journal line (iwith form 39). The account no. field is filled, as well as the Bal. Account No. field. For both account numbers I've defined different global dimensions 1 and 2. After posting, 2 general ledger entries have been made.
Surprisingly the second entry - the line that balanced the first one - has the same dimension values as the first one???

Am I doing something wrong? I thought the second entry would have the dimension values of the Bal. Account number?

Best regards
Gerard

awarn

Separate your one GL line to two GL lines.

One General journal line has one and only one set of dimensions:

Line 10000 - Account ABC - Amount $400 - Balance Account 123 - Dimension 1 - XX Dimension 2 - YY

Gives 2 GL Entries with the same dimensions


You need to create two lines with opposite $ Amounts:
Line 10000 - Account ABC - Amount $400 - Dimension 1 - XX Dimension 2 - YY
Line 20000 - Account 123 - Amount -$400 - Dimension 1 - MM Dimension 2 - NN

Gives 2 GL Entries with different dimensions


-awar

greys

Thanks awar for your reply.

I see your solution, but isn't it strange that the Bal. Account doesn't work properly with regards to the dimensions ?

Regards,
Gerard

awarn

It does work properly. When you set up default dimensions on a gl account or customer or whatever, they only appear on the lines based on the value for the Account No. field. The Balance Account No's dimensions are not considered.

Dimensions on the cards do not guarantee that those dimensions are the only ones used, it only causes certain fields to be filled in on certain situations. The Balance Account No. field is not one of those situations. This is just the way Navision works and has always worked. The general rule is that to save time when entering journals, if the dimensions are the same, you can use one line, but if you want multiple dimensions, you cannot use the shortcut of one line - you have to use two.

-awarn

greys

Thanks for the explanation, it makes perfect sense!

Best regards,
Gerard