Renaming Rules appear to not discriminate between "to" and "from" even when "is exactly" is used

HappyNorml
HappyNorml Member ✭✭✭
edited October 23 in Troubleshooting

I use ALLY bank and have a number of regular transfers to various sinking funds (Travel, Annual Bills, etc). ALLY bank transfers (as happens with various banks) are not always named ideally by Simplifi. A scheduled transfer is displayed on the original Statement that as:

"Requested transfer to ALLY BANK Savings account XXXXXX####"

"Requested transfer from ALLY BANK Savings account XXXXXX####"

The Quicken name truncates the end so that the transfer to exclude the account number. This results in all transfers having the same name in the register which is confusing. The naming convention for different banks is different and a similar version of this problem appears for a number of the other banks I also use (and am guessing others have seen this).

The new rules to rename the payee feature has been excellent upgrade and has allowed me to deal with the problem above by setting up rules based on the original statement name so that the transactions are named "Travel Fund Transfer" or "Annual Bill Fund Transfer" etc. (Thank you, Dev team!)

The problem I've run into is that the rules do not seem to distinguish the words "to" and "from" when trying to create rules to specify the direction of the transfer in the name. Using the example above, when trying to create two different rules using the 2 different original statement names to rename the payees differently (ex: "Contribution to XXX Fund" and "Use of Funds from XXX"), the rules seems to treat both of these statement the same way — renaming all transactions with the same name. It doesn't matter if I use "contains" or "is exactly" when specifying the matching criteria.

Not a major deal-breaker (the basic rename feature is already a huge improvement), but I thought I'd mention it in case its affecting others. Not sure if the rules feature skips certain words by design or more likely has some level of leniency built in allowing it to be "off" by a few characters or a word and still match. I would propose that when "is exactly" is chosen, the rules should be strictly "exact."

Anybody else notice any other instances of rules using "is exactly" that match even if the criteria is not an exact match?

Tagged:

Comments

This discussion has been closed.

Categories