SAP for Utilities Discussions
Connect with fellow SAP users to share best practices, troubleshoot challenges, and collaborate on building a sustainable energy future. Join the discussion.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

P2P fulfillment and Clearing rule interaction

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

I am facing an issue related to Promise to Pay (P2P).

We are using FP2P1 to create P2P.  The open items listed in FP2P1 creation screen appear to be sorted based on net due date (ascending), document number( ascending), amount (descending).  The user selects the open items from the top and downward, until the promised amount is exhausted.  When the payment is posted, the clearing sequence configured in the clearing variant is that first by the cash discount due day (ascending), division (ascending) and main transaction (ascending).  Therefore, the payment would clear the items that not included in the P2P, however, the fulfillment is calculated based on the each P2P item's clearing status. For example, the customer has promised to pay $200.  P2P includes document A, B, C for the total of 200.  The customer paid $200 before the check date.  However, the payment has cleared document A, D, E.  When the P2P is evaluated, it is not fulfilled because only document A is cleared.

I would like to sort open items in the FP2P1 creation screen in the sequential order that is consistent with our clearing rule.  I checked event 182 to 191, but not sure if one of them is called at time of open item selection.  Do you think it is possible to add open item sorting logic in event 187? 

Thank you very much for your help.

Jennifer

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

AmlanBanerjee
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Jennifer,

Going through your scenario, I think you are looking for a clearing rule where in if any payment comes, it will first clear the outstanding promise to pay documents and then would clear the normal receivables.

This would eventually not break the P2P in the valuation run.

Assuming my understanding is correct, I would recommend you to configure a new clearing step in the clearing variant.

In this step for the clearing approach for Promise to pay, first group by main transaction and Doc no. and then Sort by main transaction and due date.

In the Group rule, use value 8 and plug in a custom FM.

This custom FM will filter the P2P Items based on the Doc type, Main transaction and due date , then sort FKKCL_E115 structure by ascending due date and flag the value Y_GEN_CLRG_PROPOSAL.

The function module that you need to enhance is FKK_SAMPLE_TFK115.

Hope it helps...

Thanks,

Amlan

View solution in original post

17 REPLIES 17

former_member215295
Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Jennifer,

looks like event 121 is more suitable for your requirement.

thanks,

Vikram

0 Kudos

Hi Vikram,

Thank you very much for your reply.  I just read the document of event 121, and it does seem promising.  I will give it a try.  Thank you.

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Hi Vikram,

After I put a break point at event 121, then used FP2P1 to create a P2P, the event 121 was not called. Could you please let me know the condition to call event 121 at time of FP2P1 transaction?  Thanks.

Jennifer

AmlanBanerjee
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Jennifer,

Going through your scenario, I think you are looking for a clearing rule where in if any payment comes, it will first clear the outstanding promise to pay documents and then would clear the normal receivables.

This would eventually not break the P2P in the valuation run.

Assuming my understanding is correct, I would recommend you to configure a new clearing step in the clearing variant.

In this step for the clearing approach for Promise to pay, first group by main transaction and Doc no. and then Sort by main transaction and due date.

In the Group rule, use value 8 and plug in a custom FM.

This custom FM will filter the P2P Items based on the Doc type, Main transaction and due date , then sort FKKCL_E115 structure by ascending due date and flag the value Y_GEN_CLRG_PROPOSAL.

The function module that you need to enhance is FKK_SAMPLE_TFK115.

Hope it helps...

Thanks,

Amlan

0 Kudos

Hi Amlan, 

Thanks a lot for your reply.  I did suggest to the business that changing clearing rule to first clear the items included in P2P would remove the inconsistency, however, business would like to keep the clearing rule as it.  I do agree that clearing rule should drive the sequence of P2P, not other way around. 

Nevertheless, your information has provided me great knowledge on what we can do in the clearing variant.  Thank you. 

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Hi Jennifer,

There is another way where in without changing the Clearing rule configuration, you can control the clearing of an payment to open items.

You can use Event 0110 which assigns an available amount to open items. The selected items are cleared or partially cleared on the basis of this assignment.

The available amount results from the line items already entered, which are transferred using tables T_FKKOP and T_FKKOPK.The open items available for selection are transferred in the T_FKKCL table.

In here you can plug in an custom FM and based on your business requirement, you can control the assignment of the incoming payment against the P2P documents. 

Hope it helps

Thanks,

Amlan

0 Kudos

Hi Amlan. 

Currently, under event 110, the standard FM ISU_CLEARING_PROPOSAL_GEN_0110 is active.  When I set the break point on this FM, and then use FP2P1 to create a P2P, this FM is not called.  So I think this FM is not called at time of P2P creation.  I also checked the event 121, as suggested by Vikram, it is also not called at time of P2P creation.  Is there any way to call event 110 or 121 when creating P2P?

Many thanks,

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Jennifer:

I dont think that the system works as you are requesting.  P2P creation assigns the items to the P2P - but it does not identify how the items can/will be cleared.  That is only handled during payment processing.  The screen during creation is sorted - but that is not meant to indicate anything about clearing.  The document items have to be sorted in some fashion, and you will not be able to change that without modifying the screen - and might still not meet your requested objective.

regards,

bill.

0 Kudos

Hi William,

Thank you for your reply.

When we display a P2P (FP2P1) and click the "items" tab, we will see line items and their clearing documents and clearing reason.   Right below that, it is "Payment Promised" and "Payment made" two sections.  The intention of this screen is to show the users if these items are cleared by incoming payments and summarize the total payments and the total open items left.  Given this intention, the P2P open item selection should consider the subsequent clearing.

I could use event 185 to calculate the fulfillment without considering how open items are cleared.  But the "Items" tab would look "funny" - it may show 100% fulfillment but most of the P2P line items are still open, because the incoming payment has cleared other items outside of the P2P. 

At this point, we have to modify Include LFKB4FT0 to sort the open items based on the clearing variant and select them until the promised amount is exhausted, because we do not want to disconnect customers if the P2P shows unfulfilled but customer in fact has paid what he has promised. 

Thanks.

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Jennifer:

What do you mean by 'funny' - and showing 100% when items not cleared?  We would only expect 100% fulfillment when all items within the P2P have been cleared.  How is it that you are showing 100% without clearing the items?  Have you customized the fulfillment events to indicate otherwise? Maybe a screenshot to indicate your issue.

regards,

bill.

0 Kudos

Hi Bill,

Sorry for my late reply.  Please see below.  The line items represent all open items available at time of creating P2P.  The open items highlighted in yellow were at the top of the selection screen and were selected by the users.  The total amount of P2P = $150.  Customer paid $150 on the payment date, but the payment cleared the open items that highlighted in green, because the clearing rule is different from the sorting rule of the selection screen.  

Therefore, only $128.66 out of $150 were cleared by the payment, the fulfillment is 85.77%.  Customer got a disconnection notice after the system considered the P2P was unfulfilled. 

I am looking for a suggestion on how to sort the open times based on the sequence of clearing. 

Another alternative is that I leave the open  item selection as is, but change the calculation logic of fulfillment - as long as the customer pays the promised amount by payment date, regardless how the open items cleared, the fulfillment will be 100%.  But the FP2P1 "items" tab would show some items still open when the fulfillment is 100%. 

I hope I have addressed the issue clearly.  If you have further questions, please let me know.  I appreciate any insight you can share with me.

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Hi Jennifer,

I don't think without making any changes in the clearing rule, you will be able to cater your requirement.The system has to be feed by the logic to clear the P2P items first ahead of the normal receivables in the customer account.Check SAP Note 1376818 as well.

Two possible alternatives which I could think off-

(a) The P2P items against the customer account can be put on direct debit. Standard SAP has this functionality.This will eliminate the clearing issue.

(b) Lower the fulfillment criteria to 80%-85% based on the Business requirement. Though not a foolproof  solution, but it will take care the most of the P2P scenarios.

Hope it helps...

Thanks,

Amlan

0 Kudos

Hi Amlan,

Thank you for your suggestions.

Our clearing rule reflects the regulatory and business requirements and therefore we cannot change it. If we create P2P based on the standard SAP open item sorting logic, and then clear them first, it would violate our clearing rule. 

I do not quite understand your suggestion - "The P2P items against the customer account can be put on direct debit".  Could you please elaborate it if you get a moment?  Thank you!

I just received SAP's reply to my OSS message.  Below is the reply: 

"I checked the situation in our reference system and I found out that

the displayed fields of the open item processing in transaction fp2p1

results from customizing (under FI-CA=>Basic Functions=>Open Item

Management=>Define Line Layout Variants for Open Item Processing).

Unfortunately there is no possibility to define a default sorting

variant. Also in the open item processing itself is no option to

define a default sorting. As the functionality does not exist I

recommend you to fill a development request. In SAP note 11 you'll

find more information about it."

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Hi Jennifer,

When creating a P2P for a customer, SAP provides a functionality to pay the P2P amount only through direct debit and not for the full account.

Please refer to the following screenshot where in during the creation of a P2P,you can assign the payment method and other relevant details. So on the payment date of the P2P installment, the direct debit run (FPY1) will pick them up and post the payment document.   

This will ensure that when a payment comes in, it will not clear the P2P items as it has already been cleared by the direct debit payment.

Hope this clarifies.

Thanks,

Amlan

0 Kudos

Jennifer:

Your other option would be to build a custom front-end which created the P2P based on your rules and assigned the documents as desired without using using the standard FP2P1 transaction.  Having said that, you will always have an issue if you create a P2P which does not include all open items AND you do not adjust your clearing rules to account for this.

regards,

bill.

0 Kudos

Hi Amlan,

Thank you, but our business does not want to limit the payment method to direct debit for P2P items.

Jennifer

0 Kudos

Hi Bill,

We are in the process of building a custom transaction to replace the FP2P1 transaction.  You are right, it seems to be the only option we have at this point.  We have not achieved the end result yet...

Thanks!

Jennifer