|
Posted by Andrew on November 16, 2007, 7:09 pm
Please log in for more thread options John Pollard wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>
>> For example, support I have 2 checks to deposit, and for the
>> sake of
>> argument I have 3 categories on one that I want to deposit and
>> 2 on
>> the other.
>> My credit union would download to me a single deposit for the
>> sum of
>> all 5 of these split items; I've already entered this deposit
>> in my
>> register using a single deposit transaction with 5 split
>> categories
>> and Quicken easily matches the deposit.
>
> One serious drawback to this approach is that (assuming the two
> checks were from two different payees), you will lose the
> ability to group those checks by payee in reports, and the
> ability to lookup those checks by payee, because a single
> Quicken transaction can only have one payee. The more checks
> you include in a single Quicken transaction, the more payee
> names you lose (in the payee name field).
True enough John but I was just trying to find out what Marc meant, giving
him a typical example of what does work. But certainly the approach you
give provides greater reporting/tracking ability. Since I don't do what you
suggested (unfortunately (?) for me, most of my 'incoming' money consists of
just one payee's payroll check), I don't have this need.
But given my anal-alosity, I certainly agree with what you suggest and I
note some other posts past these (including one from you) gives some good
procedures to use via an intermediate account usage.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Regards -
- Andrew
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap