Currency Mismatch. Deposit greater than call.

While working back and trying to clear some temporary items we've carried, I came across another problem. A problem that, at least to me is a bit more complex then my last question, but also involves a "Deposit greater than call."

This problem goes back to the June 4th batch of 2006. There were several errors on that batch; But on the July 2006 Finacial statement we see the following:

1. A "Deposit greater than call." for $30 dollars. This showed up as $30 in the Other colum on the statement.
2. A "Currency reported $862. Actual $849." This showed up as -$13 in the Other colum on the statement.

This equals $17. We have had a temporary item of -$17 for along time that I've needed to research. I believe this mistake in this old batch is where the $17 has come from.

The "Deposit greater than call." part, I will start by going back through the slips and looking for a difference between the slips and what was recorded in MLS.

I'm not sure though, how to go about fixing the currency mismatch in MLS.

On the Deposit report for the 06/04/06 batch in question. There was 849.00 currency. 13.42 Coin. Totaling 862.42 (the amount of the checks were correct and not relevant.)

Right away it looks like we may have forgot to add the coin to the pouch because the bank is reporting thier actual is 849.00.

One odd thing though, is that on our yellow copy of the deposit slip for currency, we recorded 862.42. (the bank said we reported 862.00)

Is it normal for them to round down like that. Dropping the 42 cents?

Any insight would be appreciated, though I know it probablly needs to be addressed through CHQ finacial support. -thanks

sklamm wrote:1. A "Deposit greater than call." for $30 dollars. This showed up as $30 in the Other colum on the statement.
...
The "Deposit greater than call." part, I will start by going back through the slips and looking for a difference between the slips and what was recorded in MLS.

It's particularly interesting that the "deposit greater than call" happened on the same deposit that seems to actually be short. Of course, it's possible to be high in the checks and low in the cash.

I think your plan to go through the deposit slips and checks is a good one. Of course the problem could have been a misreading of the check that both the clerks and the donor made. One way this happens is when the written amount doesn't match the numeric amount on the check. For example, the check says $100 and "One hundred thirty dollars". The bank tends to trust the written amount, while clerks tend to focus on the numeric amount. If the slip also says $100, you won't have anything in your records that will show the problem.

I'm sure you know that these things are much easier to fix right away -- waiting more than two years is going to increase the difficulty of tracking down the problem. But you definitely need to get rid of the temporary items.

sklamm wrote:One odd thing though, is that on our yellow copy of the deposit slip for currency, we recorded 862.42. (the bank said we reported 862.00)

Is it normal for them to round down like that. Dropping the 42 cents?

If you wrote the 862.42 in the currency line, it could be standard bank procedure to drop the cents, since currency can't have any cents.

sklamm wrote:2. A "Currency reported $862. Actual $849." This showed up as -$13 in the Other colum on the statement.
...
On the Deposit report for the 06/04/06 batch in question. There was 849.00 currency. 13.42 Coin. Totaling 862.42 (the amount of the checks were correct and not relevant.)

Right away it looks like we may have forgot to add the coin to the pouch because the bank is reporting thier actual is 849.00.

You didn't say what you recorded on the yellow copy of the deposit slip for coin. I wonder if you recorded 862.42 for currency and left the coin amount blank, rather than 849.00 for currency and 13.42 for coin. If so, it's conceivable that the bank

• trusted your amount of 0 for the coin
• took your 862.42 for currency, but rounded it down to 862.00 because currency has no coin
• compared the 862.00 to the actual 849.00 currency in the deposit
• and reported that you were 13.00 short on currency

Finally, I would throw out one really long shot idea: what if the error were discussed over the phone, and the bank said there was a "thirteen" dollar error, and the person at Church Finance heard "thirty" dollar error? This could be the result of $13 of unexplained coin being in the deposit bag. If so, the errors would actually cancel out.

I'm not sure if you'd be able to investigate that possibility, but you would definitely need the help of someone in Church Finance support to examine the Church's records of what happened with that deposit.

An additional scenario for the deposit greater than call is a donation that does not get recorded in MLS but is included in the deposit bag. This would be caught by a review and comparison of the Tithes and Other Offerings slips against the donation batch in MLS. However, the most likely cause is the one Alan mentioned since this error scenario would probably have been caught by now. I mention this because the error Alan points out in the deposit slip indicates a potential that either one or both of the brethren was probably new and not familiar with the procedures or there were interrupting distractions during the processing of the donations.

From my experience, we have never been able to resolve a "deposit greater than call" or "deposit shortage" after the fact. Sure, we go through the slips, but have never found a difference from what was originally entered. The main issue is no one remembers after the fact - they all assume they donated what they wrote on the slip. While you still have to do the review and hopefully can find the discrepancy, the take home message I share with the ward clerks is they have to be extremely careful when opening and entering donations - especially cash.

There is also always the option the bank made an error when they counted the donations. However, Alan_Brown's suggestion about the written and numeric amounts being different is a possibility, albeit one that is very difficult for you to investigate.

crislapi wrote:From my experience, we have never been able to resolve a "deposit greater than call" or "deposit shortage" after the fact.

Hummm... I've been able to resolve these a few times. Work with the CHQ finance helpdesk. They can put you in touch with the person there who has direct responsibilities for your particular bank. In my case, they contacted the bank directly and was able to email me photocopies of all the checks deposited in that batch, along with their deposit statement. It was then a matter of finding a 4-way match using the donor slips, MLS batch report, bank deposit statement, and check photocopies for each entry. (Of course, cash donations wont have a check associated with them.) Armed with a complete picture of what happened, errors are much easier to find.

Thanks. That's great info.

crislapi wrote:From my experience, we have never been able to resolve a "deposit greater than call" or "deposit shortage" after the fact.

I know in this case you are going back to reconcile, but this does point up how important it is to resolve any differences as soon as they are known. A month or two when the discrepancy shows up on the unit statement is long enough to forget the details but be able to retrieve them. A year or two and the memories are not there to retrieve.

Hope you are able to work it out.

Once again, many thanks for the guidance and suggestions. lajackson is 100% right about not procratinating, and making corrections as soon as possible after the problems are discovered.

This forum will be an invaluable tool for people like me who are struggling with this calling with respect to the fundamentals; Not withstanding how much MLS has foolproofed and automated the process; and the quality of the churches other interactive training material.

I'm the person who could never keep my own personal checkbook balanced. Often in the past, by the time I've found someone to help with the problem, I've lost what tenuous grasp I may have had on my question to start out with.

Anyway, with this new Internet connection and the tech. forum I appreciate the ability to formulate questions while I'm fully concentrating on problem at hand.

Again, I appreciate you guy's willingness to help, and I look forward to being able to contribute more in the future.