When Re-Categorising transactions make the description match more flexible to include variable numbers in the transaction description
complete
T
Tim Groves
Currently:
When you re-categorise a transaction and you select either of the "and past matching transactions" or "future matching transactions", the transaction description needs to match exactly.
However, sometimes there are transactions where they are the same for all intents and purposes, but there might be a random number of date in the transaction description so the "matching transactions" logic doesn't get triggered.
Aidan Scott
complete
This is now live 🎉
If you recategorise a transaction from now on, and that transaction description has random digits e.g; timestamps or dates, SortMe will ignore these variable numbers and apply the category to similar transactions.
Aidan Scott
in progress
Aidan Scott
Merged in a post:
Ability to edit transaction reference/details to be captured in future transactions
J
Jay B
For example, my partner's salary has a different reference detail each payment because it includes the month so it says "[Company Name] Salary DDMM" but because the dates differ each time, I have to code this manually every time. It would be great if we could change the details (like in tools such as Xero) to remove the variable bits so the system picks up on the future transactions.
Aidan Scott
Fully agree with this, I'll merge this into a similar post and group the votes together.
Aidan Scott
planned
Aidan Scott
Merged in a post:
Smarter auto-categorisation rules
I have a number of recurring transactions with the SAME vendor that do not have a merchant associated and have a different reference and particulars each time, e.g.:
- Monthly fee IN-12099 Jul 2024
- Monthly fee IN-11731 Jun 2024
Currently I have to manually categorise these each recurrence.
I also have a number of transactions with DIFFERENT vendors that do not have a merchant associated but have the same reference and particulars. I don't want to categorise these in the same way unless they are to the same bank account.
I would like to be able to edit the auto-categorisation rule to account for these scenarios. I don't know what the exact solution would be but I think it would need to take into account the bank account number and some sort of wildcard/fuzzy text matching on the reference field.
L
Lisa Eyre
Yes, this is limiting the effectiveness of the transaction categorisation. For example, I have a weekly income payment that includes a date code in the transaction description. Each week this transaction appears as "uncategorised" and when I try to categorise it, it wants to apply the full description (including the unique date code) to any past or future matching transactions. Of course, there are no other exact matches given the unique date code.
Aidan Scott
Hey Tim, not sure I understand, are you wanting to search for the dynamic number in your list of transactions?
T
Tim Groves
Aidan Scott
Poorly described sorry.
Sometime transactions that are regular come through with as an example "test company payment 1234" where 1234 is dynamic, so every time this company pays or i pay someone I manually categorize.
my thoughts are to map "test company payment" this part as something the system recognizes and categorizes automatically.
Hopefully a little better explained here.