Missing tenancy and tenants for a document

[andortamas]

Good morning,

We have a client (SAV-GITC) who has a document (LCS23006289). We can retrieve the tenancyID from the associatedId (CLE230702), but the /tenancies/CLE230702 call returns with the following error message: "Entity \"Tenancy\" (CLE230702) was not found."

On the Reapit desktop app our client can see the tenancy and the main tenant details. Can you have a look at it please why the data is missing from the API?

We have another 4 cases for this client where the property/tenancy are missing. I can share them if you'd like to.

Kind regards, Andor

Specification

• Book some time in diary with HP to understand where we've got to date. It's highly likely this is office group related but we need to unpick the comments below along with the way the APIs apply their filters when office groups are in scope

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Hi @andortamas, the app has been installed for office group SAV-GITC which contains office CTS. Record CLE230702 is assigned to another office (SRL) and therefore you will not have the correct permissions to access that record.

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Happy for you to provide additional records so I can verify if it's the same situation.

[andortamas]

Hi,

Many thanks for investigated this. Here is the other documents where no tenancy/property found:

RPT23078280 RPT23078326

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Hi @andortamas do you have the tenancy references please?

[andortamas]

Hi @HollyJoyPhillips

I get the following errors for these documents:

DocumentID: RPT23078280 associatedType: property associatedId: CLV230981

Getting the properties/CLV230981 says: "Entity \"Property\" (CLV230981) was not found."

---

DocumentID: RPT23078326 associatedType: tenancy associatedId: CNL233446

Getting the tenancies/CNL233446 says: "Entity \"Tenancy\" (CNL233446) was not found."

Thanks, Andor

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Hi @andortamas thank you for the references. I can confirm it is the same security settings. CLV230981 is associated to office PUL and CNL233446 is associated to office CNL. Neither are in the group SAV-GITC.

For you to have access based on the current installation, office CTS needs to be associated to the property/tenancy either as a primary or secondary office. Hope that helps.

[andortamas]

Hi @HollyJoyPhillips

Many thanks for your investigation. We'll contact to our client.

Kind regards, Andor

[github-actions[bot]]

It looks like you have commented on a closed issue. If your comment relates to a bug or feature request, please open a new issue, and include this issue number/url for reference. For more information on our processes, please click here

[andortamas]

Good afternoon,

Savills report that the groups are set up correctly with appropriate permissions on the tenancy. During a call with Ross Lavender @ Reapit this was confirmed.

Savills have requested that we reopen the case so that this can be further investigated as the problem is ongoing.

Note that this issue only pertains to the data imported during Savills' migration to Reapit. All newly created records (with the same permissions) do not have this issue.

One sample where you can check this issue:

Getting the property by the ID WDL140073 returns a landlord object: "landlord": { "href": "/landlords/WDL140060" },

However getting this, I get the following error: { "statusCode": 404, "dateTime": "2023-10-03T11:01:13.8575697Z", "description": "Entity \"Landlord\" (WDL140060) was not found." }

Can you investigate this please?

Regards, Andor

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Hi @andortamas Please can you confirm the customer ID (client ID)?

[andortamas]

Hi @HollyJoyPhillips Sure. It is SAV-GUKL

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Hi @andortamas Thank you for confirming. So the property belongs to Windsor Lettings (WDL) which is associated to that office group but the landlord is actually associated to just Windsor (WDS) which is part of a different office group. It's the same situation as above.

Property:

Landlord:

[andortamas]

Hi @HollyJoyPhillips,

Many thanks for confirming the situation re the Landlords. That's understood. The current issue relates to the missing tenants as per the start of this thread. The tenant is missing from API calls for many tenancies that were imported during the data migration. Any that were added after the migration are fine (even with the same group settings). Note that Reapit has confirmed that the issue is not group permission related. We've been asked by Reapit's support to reopen this ticket on behalf of SAV so that it can be looked into in more detail.

Many thanks, Andor

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Hi @andortamas do you have any examples you can share please?

[RLAV1]

Hey @HollyJoyPhillips i have chased Savills for some examples to allow us to progress and they have come back with the below

So I have some these are all me trying to issue the doc- can you add them on? Basically tenants (triggering from the Tenancy Level): Tenancy GUL232665- see document home page. The TT should show here

HEL234439

I wonder if the migrated tenancies are involved somehow because here are some that show fine for me all added later. The issue is this problem may reoccur at renewal stage for those documents

DOL234466

Landlords (triggering from the property Level)

Property LHL150123

This a document where the Landlord should show on this page, this will continue to reoccur every time we let the LL property so is probably even more urgent than the TT. Again though it’s not every landlord for example ISL190079

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been updated and moved to our ‘Near Term’ column (typically completed within 0 - 4 months). We have assessed the effort required and outlined a technical specification - please take the time to review this detail. When we're ready to schedule the issue, it will be assigned to the relevant board where you can continue to track its progress to completion. For more information on our processes, please click here

[plittlewood-rpt]

Hi @RLAV1 I've dropped you a message internally - can we book some time in to discuss this please

[plittlewood-rpt]

hi @andortamas - I've emailed the customer for some fresh examples. I'm pretty sure this will be just down to the office group configuration at Savills. This configuration effectively ring fences data between offices when accessed via the API. I just need to know which users are using the app when this problem occurs, so I can look at the full requests and then explain the behaviour you are seeing. Thanks

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Reached out again to customer.

[github-actions[bot]]

We have recently requested additional information relating to the issue you have raised. Please can you take the time to review this ticket and where applicable, provide the information requested. For more information on our processes, please click here

[HollyJoyPhillips]

Customer has confirmed that adding the associated office under relationships resolves the issue as expected.

[github-actions[bot]]

It looks like you have commented on a closed issue. If your comment relates to a bug or feature request, please open a new issue, and include this issue number/url for reference. For more information on our processes, please click here