THIS IS A BUG - Find & replace creates multiple instances of new memorized Payees

Tominator

This is perhaps related to Quicken's decision to turn auto-memorize payee and auto-categorize ON with the last update. There's an apparent side effect.

I was doing a series of Find & Replaces to make a Payee name more uniform AND to update/change the assigned category for the related transactions. Keep in mind I had TURNED OFF the auto-memorize stuff.

Instead of simply doing the Find & Replaces, Quicken created a whole bunch of new entries in the Memorized Payee list. OMG. I now have 240+ new repetitive entries in the Memorized Payee List all for the same PAYEE!!! (3 x 84 replacements). My domain provider, NAME-CHEAP.COM appends a transaction ID to its name on credit card charges. So NAME-CHEAP 8YXL56 might be the payee on one charge while different IDs show up on all others. Apparently renaming everything to just NAME-CHEAP (without a rule) and recategorizing from Web Hosting to Domain Service caused Quicken to create 40 new memorized payees ALL WITH THE SAME NAME, just different amounts for each of three categories. Here's just one part of this behavior. You'll note that the date created is today's date (2/9/24). This is with auto-memorize and auto-categorize TURNED OFF!!

QuickUserPSP

@Tominator this has been happening long before Quicken put the recent update in place. I do not use Memorized Payees so my list is always kept empty. But every time I use the find/replace or make mass edits, the list gets populated with payees. I have not figured out what criteria is used for which payees get added, but it just seems random at times. Since I do not use the Memorized Payee List and it is always kept empty, it is easy for me to delete all the rogue payees. I can see where it could become a mess if these payees get added to an active list. It seems like this issue has been going on for years.

QuickUserPSP

@Tominator I failed to mention that I always have "auto categorize" and "auto payee" fields unchecked.

Chris_QPW

I seldom use Find and Replace so this is the first I have seen of it; this is definitely bug and a bad one.