Returns Order Copy Control

[tariq_aziz]

Dear Auto wizards,

We are using the standard returns sales order in the VMS. The std copy control for the returns doc (sales order) is based on the (forward) sales order and as per the settings in R3 copy control for the sales order to order.

The error we are facing is expplained as follows:

If multiple vehicles say A & B are selected in a forward order and the returns order is made for the vehicle B then the returns order is picking up the value / pricing details for vehicle A. I tried several instances and realise that the returns ordr is NOT checking the 'item' or its "batch no" at the sr nos in the fwd order but simply copying the pricing values of the fwd order in the SAME sequence and not of relating to the sequence as per the returns order or in other words not picking up the pricing of B which was actually at sr no 2 in the fwd order.

When the vehicles and / or the prices are different, the returns order gives errors.

Any advise on ways to eliminate this would be highly rewarded!!!

Thanks and Regards,

Tariq

[former_member183879 · Accepted solution]

Hi Tariq,

I think there is a conceptual flaw in the process. VMS supports the process where an order can have only one material and quantity as 1 always. The configurations are also made for this in the relevant item categories at the delivery level. Hence a transaction with >1line item or one line item with >1quantity should not be executed.

Even processwise also this makes sense, because two cars cannot have the same License number, external vehicle number, internal vehicle number etc, as these are unique number for each vehicle.

So please check your process

May be because of this, the process is also enabled only to pick the prices from the first item only. I hope you are not using any of the Z actions. If you are using Zactions, please check the code of that action also.

So, in VMS, one order should have only one line item that too with only one quantity

[tariq_aziz]

Hi S Navaneetha K,

I do agree and understand that there is a possible flaw in the copy control. But I beg to differ that my process could be incorrect. Do review the same, as I elaborate it further.

I would choose 2 units...i.e. 2 batch nos (int veh nos), hence 2 VINs, hence "could be" 2 different vehicles for the SAME customer..OF the SAME sales area. As the order would be one, hence the sales areas would be required to be same. From all this, I am intending to make a sales order of two units / Batch nos to one customer. What could be wrong in this process. the customer CAN buy more than one vehicle at one time and could insist for one single document. So in my opinion the process is not wrong.

The handling of this by SAP is wrong and if you give me a moment to elaborate further, I would say it in this manner:

If we had a similar case in R3 where we would have made an order for the similar vehicles and invoiced. We would be doing a rversal based on the billing document. And the basic difference starts here: in R3 when we initiate a reversal, we choose the DOCUMENT..the reversal / return sales order to be created...copied from?...the forward billing doc..ALL the items get copied into the return sales order based on the copy control..correct? then IF we have partial have reversals, we go fwd and 'delete those line items' which are NOT required to be reversed. By this time the item values, sequencing everything has been copied..and after deletion we are (consciously) keeping only those required, hence the sequencing doesnt change and all is ok.

Whereas inVMS we start from the WHICH vehicle?...meaning which batch no. to be reversed..and THEN we choose the return sales order creation action.....so we have 'already' chosen the item(s) to be reversed THEN we make the document and THEN the copy control works...unlike the R3 scenario.

Based on this how can the functional process be wronged.? Hence the system has to be corrected rather than the process. Please do enlighten if you think otherwise.

Regards,

Edited by: Tariq Aziz on Jan 13, 2009 1:26 PM