Reconcile broken for split transfers?

Options
SomebodyInGNV
SomebodyInGNV Member ✭✭✭
When reconciling transactions in an account that doesn't have a "reconcile" item in account "Actions" menu, and the transaction being reconciled is a transfer in a split transaction initiated in an account that does reconcile, the split amounts in the parent transaction break and the parent transaction is frequently tagged as reconciled, even if it hasn't even cleared in the parent account yet.

Example: my mortgage payment originates in my checking account. It's an automated loan transaction with interest being expensed and principal being transferred to the loan account as a principal reduction. The loan account doesn't have a reconcile function at the action level but you can reconcile individual (or multiple) transactions with the context menu in the payment details register.

If you do that, then use go to matching transfer from the loan account, the parent split transaction opens showing the parent checking account transaction is corrupted. An unallocated line equal to the interest expense amount has been added and the transaction total being reduced by that amount. (I don't escrow taxes and insurance and don't know what happens to those lines, if anything.)

If you reconcile multiple past transactions in the loan account that are already reconciled in the checking account, you've now corrupted the reconciled balance and there's nothing to indicate which transactions are broken. If I'm reconciling an account and the previous reconciled balance doesn't match the bank statement, I run a report showing uncategorized transactions. There may be one or many.

This has been a problem for a couple of years.

Similarly, if I reconcile a credit card payment transaction that is a transfer from another account, the parent transaction is reconciled even though it hasn't even cleared the bank. The amount isn't broken and is easily rectified by unreconciling the checking account side, but this is a long-standing bug.

Is Quicken aware of these?
This discussion has been closed.