nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

EWC+...a failure?

denmarfl

Today when I connected with BofA I got CC-501. This now makes the 4th time since converting to EWC+ on the mandated 10/12/22 date. I knew there was going to be an issue today...DirectConnect Banks ran fine and EWC,+ALL....BofA, Chase...took almost 10 mins before the OSU completed with the CC-501 Error.

At this point I don't know if I just wait and try again later??? Or De-Activate and Re-Activate all my EWC+ Accts?

What a total mess...at east for Me. In the 25+ years I used DirectConnect...I am sure I had to De-activate\Re-Activate accts...but I am hard pressed to recall Having to do so.

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

Boatnmaniac

Which version of Quicken are you running? (Help > About Quicken).

denmarfl

DeLuxe; R45.21 Build 27.1.45.21

Chris_QPW

Wait. Then try again. Also do like the help article states and use Help -> Report a problem to send the logs to the Quicken developers to let them know this is happening.

I got CC-501 errors yesterday on my Chase banking accounts. Tried again, same failure. Waited about 15 minutes tried just my Chase investment accounts, and that worked. Tried my Chase banking accounts again and it worked.

I'm in the process of checking performance of Express Web Connect and doing my different logins separately. Today the banking went fine, and then the first investment login was fine. The second one failed with CC-501.

It is my belief that the CC-501 error is communication/server intermittent error. If one starts trying to "fix it" they will just dig themselves in deeper and cause more problems.

EDIT: there is also a "Report a problem..." link on the error dialog. It does the same thing as Help -> Report a problem.

denmarfl

Thank You...you saved me a lot of wasted effort to De/Re-Activate EWC+. It had been an hour since I ran the Failed EWC+ Connection so I ran it again. Connections to all 3 banks Suscessful.
Unfortuatley I believe I had no Cleared Transaction to be downloaded...tomorrow my Connections will have available cleared Transaction so that will be a conformation all is well with the EWC+ Connection.

So here's what I think I learned. Since all 3 of my EWC+ banks failed to connect....BofA, Chase & Capital One...this was not caused by any Software or data File Issues or banks; It had to be an Intuit issue.

Chris_QPW

denmarfl said:

It had to be an Intuit issue.

The more I did into this the more complicated the system gets.
My believe was that the flow was:
Quicken (program) -> Quicken Cloud dataset -> Intuit -> Financial institution

But lately I have been studying the Quicken Cloud Sync log file which at least has the interaction between Quicken (the program) and the "Quicken Cloud dataset".

Well, I see this in the log:
http://qcs-throttle-prod2.us-west-2.elasticbeanstalk.com/mayi/sync

The is an AWS (Amazon Web Service) call. What this means is that the "Quicken Cloud" is being run on AWS and is subject to any kind of outages/problems that cloud service might have.

denmarfl

When I was speaking with an Agent from Quicken Office of the President last week....in that conversation he mentioned that the connection was utilizing Amazon Cloud and I just thought he mis-spoke ...but here you are...saying its so. Stange...that this connection has an Amazon piece that the connection is flowing thru.....

I contend; DirectConnect by FAR is\was Much better than EWC+. I heard one argument for the chnage was ID/Passwords maintained in Users Home (in Software). Lets get real...who doesn't have ID\Passwords saved in their Home....most people have cheat sheets that I have ever worked with when asissting them when they experienced Sign-in issues at various sites.

Chris_QPW

To me it isn't surprising at all that Amazon Cloud is being used. It is much more economical these days to employ a cloud service instead of having to maintain your own servers.

I totally agree that Direct Connect is much better, but unfortunately, we are talking about the US/Canadian financial industry that will not standardized on anything unless forced by the government, and our government only give "suggestions" on what to do.

I no more expect Express Web Connect +/FDX to be adopted by all of the financial institution than Direct Connect/OFX was. But that won't stop enough of them going to it that we have to just assume that for most people it is that or the highway.

Chris_QPW

P.S. On the usernames and passwords. In reality most of that discussion at least from the financial institution's side (not Quicken Inc "marketing") has to do with "aggregators".

Direct Connect/OFX is in fact not "aggregation". There isn't a third party in between. But Direct Connect/OFX is limited to very small amount of the financial institutions' users, even those that have some way to access their data from another program. Think Mint, and such, or even if you get your balances/transactions to display on one financial institution's website that come from another financial institution. In the case of an "aggregator" like Intuit/Express Web Connect, the username and passwords are being stored the aggregator's servers. This of course makes the financial institutions "nervous".

Express Web Connect + uses rotating tokens and as such the username and password isn't being used and isn't on the aggregator's server.

Direct Connect/OFX is just the casualty of fixing the "aggregator security problem" and going with one standard (FDX).

BTW the rotating token system that is being used OAuth2 is also available on the newest versions of the OFX standard, so it is possible with it to have no passwords even "at home", but the financial institutions/Quicken Inc have not kept up with the new versions of OFX. In fact, some use 1.1 which is from right after it was first introduced 20 some years ago.

mrzookie

@denmarfl

FYI: Last week, after doing a file restore, I got cc-501 errors on all of my EWC/+ accts. Contacted Q support which said I need to wait 24 hrs for the problem to clear. Sounds like maybe a reset of some kind happens on a periodic basis. I waited 10, but then decided to log out of my Quicken account and log back in. Problem cleared immediately.

jtemplin

mrzookie said:

I waited 10, but then decided to log out of my Quicken account and log back in. Problem cleared immediately.

I'd been getting CC-501 errors on my 4 BOA accounts for the past two days. Logging out of my Quicken account and logging back in also fixed the problem for me. We'll see if it stays fixed.

mrzookie

@jtemplin - I've been good for a little over a week. So far, so good. Fingers crossed.

denmarfl

Simply put, it should not be this way. If these steps we have taken are really the Fix...than Quicken should be providing Notifications of these issues and what steps we should follow to fix them. We are all ecperimenting and coming up with right solutions...but where is Quicken Support...they have the ability to send an email to all of us.

Today following yesterdays CC-501 BofA, Chase and capitalOne...failed connections....I sucessfully connected and downloaded Cleared Transaction. Each Day I connect to my EWC+ Banks....I hold my breath hoping the connection will be sucessful. I will keep writing; EWC+ is a terrible connection, it is not Stable and it is extremely SLOW...and results in Duplicate work...working at Banks Online Site and also in Quicken.

Chris_QPW

mrzookie said:

@denmarfl

FYI: Last week, after doing a file restore, I got cc-501 errors on all of my EWC/+ accts.

I want to mention I do not trust doing a restore. You aren't the first person that has mentioned having problems right after doing a restore. It is pretty clear to me that when you do a restore they are doing some kind of sync back from the Quicken Cloud dataset that can in some cases mess things up.

Personally, I never use Quicken's restore. I don't use Quicken's backup either, but I don't think that is the problem. I make copies of my data file. This is just part of my overall way of backing up my system. So, what I do is just copy/open the older version, this avoids Quicken doing a "restore". One could do the same with a Quicken backup by just change the name from .QDF-backup to .QDF (making a copy just in case before you do that) and opening the .QDF.

denmarfl

I am with you on the Copy and Paste the data File...that is how I have made/saved my data File file forever. When I was working with a Quicken US based agent recently over this EWC+ issue...and they requested a do a backup before we proceeded and they saw me do the Copy/Paste...their comment was that wasn't the way to do a proper backup....I merely replied, its the best way. One reason I prefer Copy/paste, when you need that backup...and select it...its immediate...the data File opens as if it had been in use. The Backup loads with all kinds processes...like its converting the File Data....which to me opens the Restored file subject to possible errors.

mrzookie

@Chris_QPW

I don't disagree with you. On more that one occasion after doing a restore, I've gotten the greyed out "x in a red circle" (or is it a slash, I don't remember) telling me that such and such account has been deleted. Its a real pain to get around that one.

Just to make sure I understand you, I can just take a backup file, change the name to .qdf, open it and it will work the same as a restore without resynching to the cloud?

denmarfl

All I do is, go to the Folder were the current data File is saved, copy that File. I than go to the Folder that I named Quicken CopyandPaste...and Paste the File. Now, since that Folder already has the last File with the same file name in the Folder, I rename the Old File by adding OLD to its name. Than I paste the newly current Quicken data File. When I next do a backup, I may rename a file in my Backup Folder OLDOLD...so I would have 3 backups (Copied & Pasted) ... I normally do not save more than 3 backups. If for some reason I need the Last backup, I simply Rename the data File that is being used by Quicken to OLD...and than Paste my Backup in the Quicken Folder. As I am writing this it even seems to me to be a bite complicated...but I have done this for years and never ever an issue.

Chris_QPW

mrzookie said:

@Chris_QPW
Just to make sure I understand you, I can just take a backup file, change the name to .qdf, open it and it will work the same as a restore without resynching to the cloud?

This is very slippery slope. And I want to qualify one thing before I give you what is only my opinion, I can't state any of this for certain because Quicken Inc doesn't give enough information on what they are doing to be sure of any of it. The one qualification is I never use Sync to Mobile/Web, which might be a big factor in this if you use it. Another one I don't use is Quicken Bill Manager which might have similar problems.

One has to understand why Restore was changed in the first place. From what I can tell this change came in, in the last year or so. I think it lines up with them changing the Copy so that it creates a unique file Id and disables all the online services.

The syncing of data between the Quicken data file and the Quicken Cloud dataset is a very complicated process especially if you consider the fact that the user is free to copy the data file and use it in different places and in different ways. Keeping a two-way sync is hard enough as it is without these extra complications not to mention that the Quicken data file was never designed for it.

Quicken data files have a unique Id in them that is created when they are created. They use this Id to know what Quicken Cloud dataset to talk to. If you do a Windows File copy clearly this Id will not change. The same was true of Quicken's old copy before they changed it to a "template copy".

Now imaging that you need to keep the data file and the dataset in sync. I will start with "really bad situation" that was certainly happening in the past, and maybe still happening. Person makes a copy of their data file, and the unique Id isn't changed (Windows File copy or old Quicken copy method). Now they take that data file and treat it as a template for another completely different data file. This was the recommended way doing this in the past BTW. Now you have two data files that have say different accounts in them trying to sync to the same Quicken Clouds dataset. You can see where this would be real problem if anything is synced to that Quicken Cloud dataset. Remember also about 2 years ago they change the Express Web Connect flow so that "sync to Quicken Cloud dataset" is how they get the transaction into Quicken.
https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7882641/qcs-express-web-connect-is-cloud-sync

So, if you use Express Web Connect/Express Web Connect + you are in fact doing "sync to the Quicken cloud dataset" (most likely with less data than Sync to Mobile/Web uses).

But the mixing of the different data files with the same unique Id isn't the only problem you might face trying to do a two-way sync. User has a problem and decides to do a restore. And the restore is old enough that things like an account is deleted, or an account use to be activated, but isn't now, ...
And it is your job to now decide what information in the data file and the dataset needs to be exchanged and in what direction. And notice I said direction. One might think that the data file is always the "master" and you transfer from it to the dataset to resolve differences but remember Sync to Mobile/Web. You could very well have more recent data in the Quicken Cloud dataset if say the user did manual updates on Mobile/Web or even if it downloaded transactions last.

I definitely believe that they changed Restore so that it tries to "sync back" from the Quicken Cloud dataset in some cases. That is why it is risky. I might add that Quicken Inc has stated that you shouldn't do restores very much because you will get the error of running out of datasets. What that means to me is that they are changing it so much that they don't trust the old copy, and as such as part of the process they make a new dataset to work with in this syncing/restore. And they have a requirement not to throw way the copy unless the user directly contacts them to do that.

Clearly, if you don't use Restore you are sticking with the original Quicken Cloud dataset.

So, very long explanation, but I will say that I have had very good luck with just using an old copy as my "restore". I don't go back very far usually, but because of all the testing I do, I do this on a very regular basis.

If one wanted to be super cautious what they would do is delete the Quicken Cloud dataset before opening up the copy of their data file forcing all "syncing" to go from the Quicken data file to the Quicken Cloud dataset. But note any information that isn't in the data file might be lost. As in it might lose the state of the connections to online services.

I don't think there is a "perfect" way of doing this. Copy and open has worked for me with my use case, but people using more of the online services my find that it isn't ideal for them.

mrzookie

@Chris_QPW

That's a pretty scary post. Fortunately, I don't use either quicken mobile or web, and have no intention of doing so in the future. I do find myself doing a restore 5-6 times a year for various reasons, but after reading your post, I probably can cut that number in half without too much trouble. I've read about "running out of datasets" in other posts, but since there's no way to count, I've always tried to use the restore sparingly. I will do so even more now. Thanks for the info.