Known issues

The table below lists known issues identified across releases. We are actively investigating and resolving them as part of our commitment to continuous improvement.

ID	Description	Status	Found in version	Fixed in version	Workaround
373904	When a registered settlement produces more than one posted purchase invoice, the invoices after the first are labeled Posted Purchase Invoice (3rd Party Commission) instead of Posted Purchase Invoice (Settlement) on Related Documents.	Resolved	2501.0.0.0	2602.2.0.0	Verify the posted purchase invoices directly on the Posted Purchase Invoices page by filtering the Vendor Invoice No. field for the pattern {SettlementNo}-1, {SettlementNo}-2, and so on.
376512	Selecting the Cost Details action on a Document Cost line in an Account Sale settlement incorrectly opens the Pooling Cost Details page instead of the Account Sale Cost Details page.	Under investigation	2602.0.0.0
376622	When a cost template line with Deduction Method set to Document Costs is used in an Account Sale settlement, costs from unposted sales documents are not shown on the settlement line. The same scenario works correctly when the accounting method is set to Pooling.	Under investigation	2602.0.0.0
377003	The settlement calculation includes document trade lines that are marked as Non-Reversible, which should be excluded from the calculation.	Resolved	2602.0.0.0	2602.2.0.0
379014	When determining the eligible base for a purchase invoice line, the system considers only the first document trade line for a given document and trade plan combination. In scenarios involving sales returns and cost reversals, this can result in an incorrect eligible base because related reversal lines are not aggregated.	Under investigation	2602.0.0.0
379318	When a cost template line uses Invoice Quantity Type set to Eligible Base and the settled lot was consumed in a production order alongside other lots, the invoice quantity does not apply each lot's quantity factor to the eligible base. Affected purchase invoice lines show the full eligible base instead of the proportional amount.	Under investigation	2602.0.0.0
380431, 388904	When a G/L account cost template line is applied to a purchase order that has multiple partial receipts, the G/L entries created for each receipt are linked to both item ledger entries via the transaction number, causing the cost to be duplicated in the settlement calculation.	Resolved	2602.0.0.0	2602.1.0.0
385881	When the Group Lines or Undo Manual Changes action is run on the Pooling Overview page, the resulting sort order of the pooling lines is incorrect.	Resolved	2602.1.0.0	2602.2.0.0
387868	When the Actual if exists cost application method is used, the Cost Amount (Account Sale) and Cost Amount (Pooling) field values differ between account sale and pooling detail lines of type Costs for the same cost, instead of being aligned.	Under investigation	2602.1.0.0
387869	When a consignment has no dedicated cost template configured, the Actual if exists cost application method is not applied to consignment costs; the system continues to apply the legacy Actual if one exists logic instead.	Resolved	2602.1.0.0	2602.2.0.0
388724, 388908	When a cost template line uses the Actual if exists cost application method and the trade plan is set to post to a G/L account, the cost applied to the settlement is calculated using the legacy Actual if one exists logic instead of summing the actual and expected amounts across postings.	Resolved	2602.1.0.0	2602.2.0.0
388859	When multiple purchase orders are pooled together in one settlement and a lot attribute sorting template sorts on numeric lot attribute values (for example, size), the sort order within a group is not applied correctly.	Under investigation	2602.1.0.0
389049	When a trade plan set to post to a G/L account, with Accrual Type set to Actual Cost, is applied to a transfer order received in multiple partial receipts, the actual cost posted on invoicing is linked to the wrong item ledger entry, resulting in an incorrect total cost in the settlement calculation.	Resolved	2602.1.0.0	Resolved in Aptean Trade Management	This issue was resolved by a fix in the Aptean Trade Management extension, not in Aptean Grower Return, and is not part of the Grower Return 2602.2.0.0 release notes.