scheduled transactions, part deux

Posted by EdStevens on February 5, 2008, 9:15 pm

Please log in for more thread options

Quicken 2006 Dlx on Vista

Set up two paychecks, which have been automatically entering in the
register right on schedule. Decided I had a couple of other
transactions that I wanted to enter on schedule with the paychecks.
Couldn't find the paychecks in the 'memorized payee' list so manually
memorized an occurrence of each, then set up scheduled groups that
included each paycheck - one group per paycheck and associated
transactions. Didn't notice anything amiss until the first one hit
the schedule to be entered into the register, when I noticed that the
memorized payees were set as 'split transactions' rather than
'forms'. Poked around and didn't see any way of getting the paycheck
(form) transactions into a scheduled group.

advice?

Thanks.

Posted by John Pollard on February 5, 2008, 10:52 pm

Please log in for more thread options

EdStevens wrote:

> Quicken 2006 Dlx on Vista

> Set up two paychecks, which have been automatically entering

> in the

> register right on schedule. Decided I had a couple of other

> transactions that I wanted to enter on schedule with the

> paychecks.

> Couldn't find the paychecks in the 'memorized payee' list so

> manually

> memorized an occurrence of each, then set up scheduled groups

> that

> included each paycheck - one group per paycheck and associated

> transactions. Didn't notice anything amiss until the first

> one hit

> the schedule to be entered into the register, when I noticed

> that the

> memorized payees were set as 'split transactions' rather than

> 'forms'. Poked around and

> didn't see any way of getting the paycheck

> (form) transactions into a scheduled group.

I agree. You can't memorize the form for the transaction, so
you can't schedule a Group transaction that contains any
transactions with forms.

--
John Pollard
First initial underscore Last name at mchsi dot com
Please reply to newsgroup

Posted by EdStevens on February 6, 2008, 8:30 pm

Please log in for more thread options

> EdStevens wrote:

> > Quicken 2006 Dlx on Vista

> > Set up two paychecks, which have been automatically entering

> > in the

> > register right on schedule. Decided I had a couple of other

> > transactions that I wanted to enter on schedule with the

> > paychecks.

> > Couldn't find the paychecks in the 'memorized payee' list so

> > manually

> > memorized an occurrence of each, then set up scheduled groups

> > that

> > included each paycheck - one group per paycheck and associated

> > transactions. Didn't notice anything amiss until the first

> > one hit

> > the schedule to be entered into the register, when I noticed

> > that the

> > memorized payees were set as 'split transactions' rather than

> > 'forms'. Poked around and

> > didn't see any way of getting the paycheck

> > (form) transactions into a scheduled group.

> I agree. You can't memorize the form for the transaction, so

> you can't schedule a Group transaction that contains any

> transactions with forms.

> --

> John Pollard

> First initial underscore Last name at mchsi dot com

> Please reply to newsgroup

Bummer. But at least I wasn't overlooking something staring at me on
the screen.

OK, follow-on question. I started using the special form-related
paycheck setup when it was introduced, simply because I wanted to try
out the new feature. But is there really any advantage to using them
vs. a simple split transaction that can be memorized and scheduled in
a group? (I don't even try to set things up to get a direct import
into TTax.)

Posted by John Pollard on February 6, 2008, 9:01 pm

Please log in for more thread options

EdStevens wrote:

> OK, follow-on question. I started using the special

> form-related

> paycheck setup when it was introduced, simply because I wanted

> to try

> out the new feature. But is there really any advantage to

> using them

> vs. a simple split transaction that can be memorized and

> scheduled in

> a group?

I'd say that if you haven't answered that question for yourself
in the affirmative, you probably won't miss the form at all.

But I thought that seeing only a plain split transaction in your
Group generated transactions, instead of seeing the paycheck
form, was a problem for you. If you don't mind getting plain
split transactions, isn't that what you're getting now?

I think the Paycheck Wizard does make it easier to create the
paycheck, so I'd use it for that reason.

[The Paycheck Wizard will set some things up for you that you
might have to think about in order to get them right. But if
you needed a guide, you could use the Wizard to setup a
paycheck, enter one paycheck in some account register, create a
transaction report showing all the split lines ... then create
your own non-Wizard paycheck to match the one the Wizard
created.]

--
John Pollard
First initial underscore Last name at mchsi dot com
Please reply to newsgroup

Posted by John Pollard on February 6, 2008, 9:23 pm

Please log in for more thread options

John Pollard wrote:

> But I thought that seeing only a plain split transaction in

> your

> Group generated transactions, instead of seeing the paycheck

> form, was a problem for you. If you don't mind getting plain

> split transactions, isn't that what you're getting now?

I just re-read my initial reply to you, and I think I phrased it
badly.

I said: "You can't memorize the form for the transaction, so you
can't schedule a Group transaction that contains any
transactions with forms."

The first part of the sentence is correct, you can't memorize
the form when you memorize a transaction that has a form; you
only get the split lines, not the form.

The second part of my sentence is misleading, at best.

As you already noted, you can include the memorized paycheck
transaction (the one that has only the split lines, but not the
form) in a Group Scheduled Transaction. The resulting register
transaction will, like the memorized transaction, have no form.

--
John Pollard
First initial underscore Last name at mchsi dot com
Please reply to newsgroup