|
|
|
|
|
|
by DanBC
4500 days ago
|
|
|
Some may say that. I couldn't comment. While I'm here I used to work for an electronic engineering sub-contractors. They had an excellent paperwork system to run production, with Sage Line 50 (when it was Sage Sovereign) doing accounts and payroll. It was great. Everyone knew exactly what was happening with any component - it was in a kit; it was in stock; it was in goods-in; it was on order; or none of those. We could tell when it had been ordered and what for and when it was due in and etc etc. then we "upgraded" to Sage Line 100 and rolled it out to include the whole company - stores, production, ordering, goods in, etc etc. it sucked. We lost all that tracability we had. |
|
|
As an example, some idiot (it's easily done) posts a credit entry as debit. All error corrections are posted to the Journal A/C, usually situated in the General Ledger, with the corresponding double entry in the A/Cs which contain the errors.
To correct the error without taking the Journal into account, one post restores the A/C to its original balance prior to the error, then another entry is required to kick the balance into its correct value. If the error originally occurred in a memorandum account, the error will trickle down to the General Ledger, so another couple of entries are required.
I think that a reverse error entry in the Sales or Purchase Ledgers that is discovered after the end of the financial period requires eight entries to correct it.
In theory some compound errors may require dozens of entries to correct.