Sepa Credit Transfer - rejected by the bank - issue with xml content

[dgouthiere]

Hi All, my name is David Gouthière - new joiner; I use Odoo to generate SCT payments and transfer xml to the bank for execution. It was my first trial, I made a real test with small amount ang get many severe issues. I had to manage the xml manually to get it loaded and executed by the bank.

I had to change to pain 03 instead of 05, and manually i had to fix somme tags in the header. to get the file accepted by the bank.
2 bugs are causing of the reject :
• 2 lines inverted in the header
• use of single quotes instaed of double quotes
As is

To be

Manually fixed, files has been accepted and executed. The day after, examination of my daily statement has shown one more mistake.
Below, a rejected file and an accepted one, so you can compare,
The accepted file have also caused an issue, you can check the effect in the statement below

Rejected file (by the bank)

sct_2015-005-DG-sprl.xml

2015/004 2015-05-28T16:08:40 1 1.21 David Gouthiere sprl BE0894513115 KBO-BCE 2015/004-20150528-NORM TRF false 1 1.21 NORM SEPA 2015-05-28 David Gouthiere sprl BE63143070432108 GEBABEBB SHAR 036 1.21 GKCCBEBB David Gouthiere (prive) BE58795551250379 Test1 filetsf avec Isabel

Accepted and executed by the bank

sct_2015-006-DG-sprl2ok.xml

2015/006
2015-05-28T18:59:45
1
1.21

David Gouthiere sprl



0894513115
KBO-BCE






2015/006-20150528-NORM
TRF
false
1
1.21

NORM

SEPA


2015-05-28

David Gouthiere



BE63143070432108




GEBEBEBB


SLEV


688105934715


1.21



GKCCBEBB



David Gouthiere (prive)



BE58795551211111







SCOR

ISO

EXJ/2015/0008

Statement - the day after

Executed, but issues anyway because communication and references are inverted, as stated on the statement. I checked the xml, and the issue is well there (it is not a mistake of the bank)

It is a critical issue, because the beneficiary will not find its expected communication and will not be able to reconcile its customer payments.

Indeed, in the xml, we can see that EXJ/2015/0008 is filled in the tag reserved for communication to beneficiary and the 688105934715 is filled into EndToEndId

Looking further, I also see that the xml is not exactly compliant with the rulebook - but here not rejected by this bank (could be by another one) : for this case, Odoo uses ISO instead Of BBA

ISO : ISO must be used when the Reference corresponds to an european Reference code (max 25 char)

In Belgium (only) this code must be BBA (Belgian Bank Association) and the value if tag must be 12 digit structured communication with check digit base on mod 97 (like old BBAN account 3-7-2).

If not structured, the tag must be used in

Here the reference to get the right rules

https://www.febelfin.be/en/standards-distance-banking

(for security reason - i have change value of my own account nr in the xml ...)

I can just report this blocking issue, I am not able to fix it, beeing not a technician. please feel free to ask more questions.

[sbidoul]

Hi David,

Regarding the BBA structured communication, the l10n_be_iso20022_pain module [1] should solve your issue.

Regarding the XML format, can you send me the files in private mail. I'll have a look.

[dgouthiere]

Hi Stéphane,
i do it now, thanks for being so fast,
David

[sbidoul]

Regarding the PAIN version 003, you can select it in the Export Type field of the Payment Mode.

[dgouthiere]

Thx, it is what I did to produce my second file.

[sbidoul]

Regarding the errors in the header, it is surprising because the xml declaration <?xml... as well as the namespace declaration emitted are valid xml and should be accepted.

Can you provide the exact error message provided by your bank?

[dgouthiere]

ok, i do it via your email to paste images easier

[dgouthiere]

Le 29/05/2015 17:36, Stéphane Bidoul (ACSONE) a écrit :

Regarding the errors in the header, it is surprising because the xml
declaration |<?xml...| as well as the namespace declaration emitted
are valid xml and should be accepted.

Can you provide the exact error message provided by your bank?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#170 (comment).

I cannot capture the message of the bank, but it just pop up :

• sct_2015-005 => attention aucun schéma n'a été trouvé
• sct_2015-006 => attention aucun schéma n'a été trouvé
• sct_2015-004 was rejected because he expected a ciri file - because
  I load a txt file instead of xml (was my fault)

ensuite, j'ai reformaté le header comme mentionné dans les spec febelfin
et c'est passé

bàv,
David

---

L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
http://www.avast.com

[dgouthiere]

Le 29/05/2015 17:36, Stéphane Bidoul (ACSONE) a écrit :

Regarding the errors in the header, it is surprising because the xml
declaration |<?xml...| as well as the namespace declaration emitted
are valid xml and should be accepted.

Can you provide the exact error message provided by your bank?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#170 (comment).

Stéphane,

Here is the expected content of the header, from febelfin source.

When you look at the sent files, you will see the differences that I
fixed manually,
Kind regards,
David

---

L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
http://www.avast.com

[sbidoul]

Hello @dgouthiere,

I did some additional tests and so far I cannot reproduce the issues you mentioned:

• the XML header is compliant (the exact format of the XML declaration and namespace attributes in the febelfin spec is just an example and is not relevant, so both the version produced by the module and the version you adapted manually are correct)
• the structuered communication is correct according to the febelfin spec when you use l10n_be_iso20022_pain from OCA/l10n-belgium

So I'm closing this issue. If you feel there is still something incorrect, do not hesitate to reopen and provide additional information.

[dgouthiere]

Le 15/06/2015 12:08, Stéphane Bidoul (ACSONE) a écrit :

Hello @dgouthiere https://github.com/dgouthiere,

I did some additional tests and so far I cannot reproduce the issues
you mentioned:

• the XML header is compliant (the exact format of the XML
  declaration and namespace attributes in the febelfin spec is just
  an example and is not relevant, so both the version produced by
  the module and the version you adapted manually are correct)
• the structuered communication is correct according to the febelfin
  spec when you use l10n_be_iso20022_pain from OCA/l10n-belgium

So I'm closing this issue. If you feel there is still something
incorrect, do not hesitate to reopen and provide additional information.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#170 (comment).

Hi Stéphane,

Thanks for feed-back !
Next week I will work on reinstalling my payment modules + the patch and
will remake a real test with the bank.

I will keep you posted

Kind regards,
David

---

L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
http://www.avast.com