11.07.2015 Views

SCT Banner Student / Release Guide / 7.0

SCT Banner Student / Release Guide / 7.0

SCT Banner Student / Release Guide / 7.0

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Section 13 Problem ResolutionsRegistration ModuleSFKFEE1 andSFKFEESSFKFEE1 andSFKFEESSFKFEE1 andSFKFEESSFKFEE1 andSFKFEESSFKFEE1 andSFKFEESSFKFEE1,SFKFEES, andSFPFAUD(#88291, #88583, and #88663)There is a problem when backing out a fee that was originally charged on SFARGFEusing negative rule. A detail code that previously generated a charge, that nowevaluates to a $0.00 charge, was not adjusting the original charge to zero. Twoadditional problem resolutions were reported (#88583 and #88663), which wererelated to the resolution to #88291. These issues have been corrected. Resolved in<strong>Release</strong> 6.1.(#88025)Refunds from SFAESTS were not being calculated correctly. When tuition and feeswere originally assessed by a flat rate and the student was subsequently withdrawn byenrollment status, the refunding was done using course liable billing hours and notapplying the percent refund to the total currency charge for the student. Refundingprocessing using SFAESTS has been corrected. Resolved in <strong>Release</strong> 6.1.(#87611)If an original assessment was run without creating accounting records, and thestudent was dropped/deleted from their courses, and then a subsequent assessmentwith postings to accounting was run, the reversals appeared on the student's accounteven though the original assessment was not recorded in accounting. This has beenupdated to verify that assessment records exist prior to posting a reversal. Resolvedin <strong>Release</strong> 6.1.(#89669)If an ESTS (enrollment status) drop assessment had taken place in the previousversion of fee assessment (SFRFASM/SFRFAS1), and then the new version of feeassessment was installed, when SFRFASC was run in update mode and no auditrecords existed, the ESTS refund was reapplied to the remainder that was left fromthe first refund. ESTS refunding has been corrected to look at the assessment dates,correctly update the audit records, and not reapply the ESTS refund. Resolved in<strong>Release</strong> 6.1.(#89515 and #87629)When flat charge hours were used, if multiple courses were dropped individuallyand fees were assessed after each drop, an incorrect amount might have beenrefunded. If all of the courses were dropped at the same time, fee assessmentrefunded the correct amount. Refunding using what was formerly referred to as a"plateau" and is now referred to as "from flat hour" processing has been correctedand determines the correct liable hours in the calculations when "from flat hours"exist. Resolved in <strong>Release</strong> 6.1.(#92435)<strong>Student</strong>, level, and campus rules on SFARGFE produced incorrect refunds forrefund by course processing when flat charging was in effect. This was reflected onSFAFAUD by incorrect values for the rule student hours and the rule liable hours.The process was assessing refunds at 100%, rather than using the SFARSTS refundrules.January 2005 <strong>Student</strong> <strong>Release</strong> <strong>7.0</strong>Confidential <strong>Release</strong> <strong>Guide</strong> 359

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!