Almost all of Paymetric’s customers integrate SAP with Paymetric via web services using SAP’s standard payment card interface (Cross Application Payment Card Interface) which Paymetric is certified with. I would be happy to discuss this with you or provide you with documentation.

Thanks,
Jennifer Radden
jradden@paymetric.com

The reason we did not use the methodology of inflating our authorization to cover the freight was that the processing bank told us this would result in penalties if the authorization did not match the settlement amount exactly.

<strong>Code for pre-auth</strong>
  "  The following assignment will only work
  "  when called from the Auto AR Program
  lv_temp = '(/PMPAY/PRE_AUTO_AR)it_open_items_selected-vbeln'.
  clear: lv_vbeln, lv_bsark.
  assign (lv_temp) to .

  if sy-subrc = 0.
    create object lor_socc.

    lor_socc-&gt;get_sales_order_for_invoice(
      exporting
        i_invoice              = 
      importing
        e_vbeln                = lv_vbeln
      exceptions
        no_sales_order_for_inv = 1
        others                 = 2
           ).
    "  Continue with the logic if the Sales Order is found for the Invoice
    if sy-subrc = 0.
      "  The PO Type is set to ECOM from the  Web Site 
      select single bsark into lv_bsark
       from vbak
       where vbeln = lv_vbeln.
      check lv_bsark = 'ECOM'.

      loop at it_ccaut_in.
*     condition for identifying AutoAR WebOrders and set 'E'
        if lv_bsark = 'ECOM'.
          it_ccaut_in-csour  = 'E'.
          modify it_ccaut_in.
        endif.
      endloop.
    endif.
  endif.

<strong>****  Settlement function module changes</strong>

****   Coding for  Web Orders Processed via Auto AR
****  These transactions must have the CSOUR set = E.  We do this based
****  on the value of the BSARK (PO Source) on the original order

  loop at it_settab assigning  where bukrs = '0003'.
    clear l_invoice.
    select single belnr into l_invoice
      from /pmpay/parcl
            where rebzg = -belnr
              and rebuk = -bukrs
              and rebzj = -gjahr
              and buzei = -rfzei.

    check sy-subrc = 0.

    " Find the sales document for the Invoice and check the BSARK for
    " ecommerce  (Only the first line item is checked !)
    clear l_bsark.
    select single bsark into l_bsark
      from vbrp inner join vbak on vbrp~vbelv = vbak~vbeln
      where vbrp~vbeln = l_invoice.

"   if the order is not found or it does not have po source = ecomm exit
"   otherwise update the ecommerce source flag
    check l_bsark = 'ECOM'.
    -csour = 'E'.

  endloop.

I know this indicator is used a lot these days. The merchant factor it in to assess the risk which in turn affects the CC fees

I have not worked with the ECommerce indicator. I assume that you are setting something on the order to indicate this order came from the web. I have seen it done a number of ways. We have an order source field (VBKD-BSARK) at my current implementation and one of the values is “WEB”. There is another field that is not visible on the screens on VBAK (I believe it may be VBAK-LOGSYSB) that also indicates the Order source. This is used by CRM for example to show that the order originated in CRM.

Using Auto AR seems to be a logical solution way of dealing with the varying shipping costs.

We implemented a user exit to retrieve a profit center in Auto AR. I believe the exit we used was ZPCCC_CUSTOMER_AR_AUTO_EXIT_RI. If I recall correctly, you have to activate it first in Table: /PMPAY/PUSREX.

There are also a few SAP notes that refer to it.Tip: Don’t limit your search to your current version. I often can find earlier notes, that while not relevant to your current version, give me a some insight on a potential solution and where to look. Some possible search terms are: ECI, E-Commerce, E-Commerce indicator.

Hope that helps. Let me know what your final solution is.

Thanks
The SAPGuy

When payment cards settle, there should only be 1 batch per day per G/L Account.

Since go live, we are seeing up to 3 batches per day settle. We only want to have 1 batch settle each day with the bank.

If this continues, we may be charged an extra service charge by the bank for multiple batches per day when there should only be 1.

Regards
Subrata

That is pretty cool. Must be some new functionality, because it certainly was not there last time I work with PM.

Thanks for sharing that.

Regards
Paul
The SAP Guy

Implementing Voids from SAP
The Void operation is performed by making a call to the external Void Function Module
from the desired SAP program or user exit. Potential uses cases for voids include when:

• The Expiration check function module is called and an authorization is marked as expired
• An order is canceled
• An order is deleted
• An authorization is deleted
• An order amount changes

In lieu of performing a DELTA authorization in SAP, Void the original Authorization and create a new one for the correct amount. If supported by your chosen Processor and the Card Issuer, the Void operation makes a call to the Processor and the original authorized amount is added back to the available credit amount in real-time. Please refer to the Cartridge documentation for your chosen
Processor to confirm if real-time voids are supported. Otherwise, the transaction is marked in the XiPay database so no further processing occurs and the funds are made available once the authorization horizon has passed.

Following are the high-level steps to configure PAS and SAP for voids with XiPay:

1. Create a new RFC Destination for Voids in SAP via transaction code SM59 with the appropriate security.
    a. If needed, see XiPay SAP Integration Guide, Install and Initial Setup Set Up RFC Destinations in SAP for detailed instructions.
2. Create a Void XAS Program in the PAS GUI.
    a. If needed, see PAS Install and Config Guide, Configuration XiPay Programs for detailed instructions.
3. Create a call to an external Operation called 'XIPAY_CC_VOID' per the following example and implement your own security objects as needed.

A call should be made from each user exit or program for which you are implementing the Void Operation.

We had a similar issue at a client. The way we dealt with it was as follows:

We calculated the maximum freight an order was likely to be charged as a percentage of the order value. So for example: We calculated that no order would ever have freight charges exceeding 10%. Then instead of authorizing a $100 order for $100, we would authorize it for $100 + 10% = $110. That way you only have one authorization. I would not hardcode that 10%. I would rather put it in a TVAR variable (TCode: STVARV) or alternatively if you have a good pricing person, save it in a statistical pricing condition. This way you can refine it on the fly without having to do code changes. Obviously, this is a user exit.

To answer your question though, it is not possible to “combine” 2 different authorizations. You cannot use authorizations more than once either. For example: if you have payment plans (typically used for projects) you have to get a new authorization for each settlement.

Another way you might be tempted to “combine” authorizations would be to simply ignore the 2 authorizations and get a new authorization for the whole amount via a user exit at billing or settlement. As I am sure you know (but it is worth mentioning for other readers), this would create further issues for the customers. While you would only get one charge appearing on customer’s credit card which would use up the new authorization, the original 2 authorizations would still “consume” the customers available credit on that credit card until those authorizations expire (7 days to 30 days, depending on the card).

Hope that helps.

Regards
Paul

The problem we are having is that now the customer sees two (or more) charges on their credit card bill, and in certain situations the billing can really look odd. For example, an order is authorized for $100, but only $95 ships, and there is a $15 shipping charge added. The total invoice will be for $110 so an additional $10 authorization is needed. The customer now sees a $100 charge and a $10 charge. Is there any way that you know of where the two authorizations or settlements can be combined so that that the customer only sees one charge of $110?

Thanks,
Anthony