[GNC] Entry of unknown transaction

[David Cousens]

David,

A possible explanation is a difference in the timing of recording of the check
by yourself and the bank if it is close to the banks closing date for the
statement. It will depend upon the time taken for the bank to clear the check
and record the deposit. These days with electronic clearance it should be pretty
quick but there are always exceptions. That might explain it not being on a
statement. It should be in the OFX data though once it has been cleared.

David Cousens


On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 00:16 -0600, Jeff wrote:
> On 2/4/23 11:46 AM, David Carlson wrote:
> > I have occasionally found a stray deposit receipt near an ATM when I 
> > was withdrawing cash.  If I carelessly pocketed it with my receipt, I 
> > might get a surprise later. The stray would have a different account 
> > number on it.  Could this be what happened to you?
> > 
> > On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 8:32 AM Michael Hendry 
> > <hendry.michael at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >     On 4 Feb 2023, at 11:58, Jeff <beastmaster126 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >     >
> >     > I have discovered several transactions that show up in one
> >     account but do not show up in any other existing account.
> >     Regardless of what the bank image shows of where the check was
> >     deposited.
> >     >
> >     > I.E.  I have a deposit slip that shows it went to our checking
> >     account but never showed up there  (OFX or printed mailed
> >     statement).  I can not reconcile it so how do  handle it?
> >     >
> >     > In other words, I have half of a double entry transaction.  More
> >     than one, unfortunately.
> >     >
> >     > --
> >     > --JEffrey Black M.B.A.
> > 
> >     Not entirely sure what you mean, Jeffrey.
> > 
> >     Are the transactions you refer to recorded in GNUCash as money
> >     paid into your account but without a recorded source account? This
> >     should have a corresponding entry in the Imbalance account,
> >     automatically created when you put in an unbalanced transaction.
> > 
> >     Did you receive a check which you deposited in your checking
> >     account and for which your received a receipt from the bank in the
> >     form of a date-stamp on the deposit slip, but for which there is
> >     no record in the bank statement (paper or electronic)?
> > 
> >     If yes, then you need to take that up with the bank - was the
> >     check bounced?
> > 
> >     When you’re reconciling, you’re matching up the bank’s view of the
> >     world with your own, and can only mark as reconciled the
> >     transactions which appear in both.
> > 
> >     Michael
> > 
> > 
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     gnucash-user mailing list
> >     gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> >     To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> >     https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> >     -----
> >     Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> >     You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > David Carlson
> 
> 
> Easiest example that I can remember off the top of my head is, my wife 
> recently wrote a check from her business account (her weeks wages) and 
> deposited it directly into our personal account.  The OFX import, and 
> statement, from our bank show it but there is no matching transaction in 
> the business account.  Our statement has an image of the check plain as 
> day but there is no match, period, in her business account 
> statement(s).  And what really has me bumfuzzled is both sets of books 
> are reconciled per their respective statements.  And it's not just one 
> transaction involved, there are multiples.  That check did not bounce, 
> it just seemingly like magic appeared in our account out of thin air. 
> Magic money.
> 
> 
> For now I have the check recorded as a deposit to our account and 
> withdrawal from Imbalance-USD.  Just wanted to get your input on if that 
> is the best way to handle transactions like that.
> 
> Her PayPal dealings are even worse but; that is for a different thread.
>