Open IowaBoy1 opened 3 years ago
TEST88 should just be enabled for testing. And disabled when no longer requiring it.
Though we probably should not be pulling TEST88 journal data.
I've been finding TEST88 erratic. But yes, it's a shared 'account', so you'll get a lot of test entries from other iATS accounts that are testing it (not just civicrm iats accounts either).
Thanks, I have it disabled. Any ideas on what to do with the bank deposits/missing contributions?
"During that time I have a recurring contribution that should have processed. It does not show up anywhere in Civi, iATS online reporting, or either of log_iats tables. However, our bank deposit for that day includes the amount of this recurring contribution." ->
🤔 Monies can not go CiviCRM -> iATS -> acquirer -> bank account without there being a record of it at the iATS/acquirer level. It's likely these monies deposited belong to a different transaction.
Our iATS online account does not have anything for the extra funds. It does not match the deposited amount.
Contact iATS customer care and ask them - those monies came from somewhere 🙂
When I have TEST88 payment processor enabled, I get lots of error log messages. Today I noticed that it also created 3000 entries in my log_civicrm_iats_journal in one day (9300 entries in the 3 days I had it enabled). The amount for these fantom entries varies from $1 to 433. The iATS customer id changes with every entry. Some have an inv id and some do not.
During that time I have a recurring contribution that should have processed. It does not show up anywhere in Civi, iATS online reporting, or either of log_iats tables. However, our bank deposit for that day includes the amount of this recurring contribution. So to make Civi match the deposit we manually created the contribution. But now it does not match IATS online.
And on a second day during this time we have a similar mismatch except we have no missing recurring contributions and so we are not sure who to match the extra funds in the deposit to.