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; } } }

Register Sort Bug

jojonono

Quicken has forever been buggy when register sorts are used, in particular "sort by cleared". When multiple transactions on the same day exist, sometimes quicken sorts the deposit first, then the withdrawals, sometimes it sorts a few withdrawals, then the deposit, then some more withdrawals, sometimes it sorts all withdrawals followed by the deposit. It results in erroneous and EXTREMELY ANNOYING false negative balances. In my case, I receive direct deposits in my checking account in very early AM hours, followed by scheduled transactions and other purchases later in the day. I'm not spending and transferring money I don't have… ever, but Quicken thinks I am. I hate this bug. Whenever a sort is made, such as by date or by cleared, there should either be a default or option to make it so deposits display first, followed by debits.

Does this exist? Can I upvote an idea somewhere? Why aren't developers fixing this of building the option to further sort display. I don't want my register showing erroneous large negative balances, and I don't want to misdate transactions to make it "look" right.

[Removed - Disruptive/Speculation]

Find more posts tagged with

Windows

balances

Transactions

Comments

NotACPA

All that matters, to your bank, is the end-of-day balance. Why do these intra-day balances matter to you?

And, at every bank where I've worked or consulted, debits are posted before credits [Removed - Repetitive/Disruptive].

jojonono

That's a false premise. I'm not a bank and I don't spend money I don't have, I can't. Bank back office ops don't apply. A bank ordinarily does not allow transactions in excess of an available balance. Since I don't spend money I don't have, quicken shouldn't organize data in such a way as to display something that isn't happening. If my bank balances were actually what Quicken displays (frequent and significant negatives), I would be fined out of existence and my account restricted or closed. Why should quicken be coded to display transaction behavior that is finable, potentially fraudulent, and potentially in violation of banking regulations or individual bank rules, when it is not in fact occuring?

I've seen repeated discussion about this but no action taken by Quicken product managers to fix it.

Quicken Kristina

Hello @jojonono,

Thank you for reaching out to the Community to share your feedback. There is an Idea that is similar to what you're looking for. Please click "View Post" below to check it out and add your vote!

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7642377/idea-allow-multi-sorting-by-multiple-columns-in-register-1-merged-vote-edited

Ideas that get enough votes may be implemented in the future!

Thank you!

NotACPA

@jojonono, Not a false premise. Re-read my signature line. I've got 40 years of experience in banking systems and I know exactly how they work. And a temporary (same day) negative amount in a Q register does not represent spending money that you don't have.

If you don't like that negative amount, you can set the sort order of the account to "Order Entered" and delete and then re-post the debits (to be after the credit) … but that's not the way that your bank does it [Removed - Disruptive].

jojonono

Thanks, I upvoted the idea, but it's from 2017!!!!! Jeeeeez. Its currently 2024. I hope I don't have to wait another SEVEN years for Quicken product managers to do something about this.

FYI to all - Quicken for Mac has a workaround, programmers have coded the ability to drag and drop transaction order.

jojonono

NotACPA - I get it, you worked at a bank and know the ins and outs of banking back office ops, however this is a Quicken glichfest that isn't aligned with reality. As I said, the negatives do not reflect any reality, which is the primary complaint of everyone who posts/complains about this.

ADDITIONALLY, please reread my original post, Quicken is inconsistently displaying the order of deposits and withdrawals. So, I just learned something new right now… in a case where the deposit is AFTER the withdrawals, if I create a duplicate deposit, it puts them both first for the day. If I delete one, the remaining one drops to last entry of the day. If I duplicate it again, they both display first, if I then delete THE OTHER transaction, the new one drops to last of the day.

Its glitchy and unpredictable, not consistent with a positive user experience.

mshiggins

"Quicken has forever been buggy when register sorts are used, in particular 'sort by cleared'".

The fact that the software does not work the way the user wants it to work, does not necessarily mean there is a bug.

A bug occurs when the software does not work the way the developers intended. Since you have provided no evidence that Quicken is not working as intended, your claim to be experiencing a bug is, at best, premature.

I don't think it makes much financial sense for Quicken to attempt to address each user's separate complaint about sorting (or any other topic). I believe the "Idea" you were referred to here has the best chance of successfully addressing the sorting desires of the most Quicken users - while giving Quicken the most bang for their buck.

With the added benefit of not requiring any determination about whether there is a bug in the current approach.

-JP