Can Individual Members Submit Expense Reimbursement Requests Online?

[razor7]

Hello Group--

I'm a newly called ward clerk, and I didn't see an answer to my question in previous posts, so here it goes.

We have a member that incurred some expenses associated with her calling. She has hard copies of her receipts, and has setup her online banking for expense reimbursements. What is the next step for her to get reimbursed? We're in a seriously locked-down area due to COVID, and we'd like to do as much of this electronically as possible.

I'm looking through my calling documentation on this subject, and I'm just seeing instructions associated with my calling, not what the member needs to do to get reimbursed.

Any help is much appreciated.

Thanks,


Stephen

[lajackson]

If she can scan and email the receipts to her organization leader or a clerk, either one of them will be able to enter the reimbursement request and name her as the payee. A member cannot enter the request on their own (unless they are also a leader).

[razor7]

If she can scan and email the receipts to her organization leader or a clerk, either one of them will be able to enter the reimbursement request and name her as the payee. A member cannot enter the request on their own (unless they are also a leader).

Understood! Thanks for the quick reply!

[sandlh@frontier.com]

... but I am a newly called Second Counselor in the bishopric and have an expense to submit. The system won't allow me to submit my own expenses. However, it will allow me to submit an expense for anyone else in the ward. Why is this? It would seem members could submit expense requests ???

[drepouille]

... but I am a newly called Second Counselor in the bishopric and have an expense to submit. The system won't allow me to submit my own expenses. However, it will allow me to submit an expense for anyone else in the ward. Why is this? It would seem members could submit expense requests ???

They say that is a feature, by design, and not a bug. No one who has access to ward financial records is able to submit his own reimbursement request. Whenever I need to be reimbursed, I have to email my receipts to someone else in the bishopric, or my assistant clerk, and ask them to create a reimbursement request for me. The first time I asked them to do that, I was reimbursed twice, because both bishopric counselors jumped on it. So I had to write a check to reimburse the ward budget for the duplicate payment.

[jdlessley]

... but I am a newly called Second Counselor in the bishopric and have an expense to submit. The system won't allow me to submit my own expenses. However, it will allow me to submit an expense for anyone else in the ward. Why is this?

Where you actually prevented from processing the payment? Or did you see a message that gave you the impression that you could not complete the payment entry. The message displayed just below the Payee text box when you enter your own name in the Payee text box is this:

The submitter should not be the payee or fast-offering recipient of the expense

That message is only a warning about fast offering payments. It does not prevent you from completing the expense payment entry into the system.

It would seem members could submit expense requests ???

Members can submit expense payment requests. The method in which they can submit them is not yet directly into the system unless they belong to an organization presidency.

[eblood66]

The submitter should not be the payee or fast-offering recipient of the expense

That message is only a warning about fast offering payments. It does not prevent you from completing the expense payment entry into the system.

The 'payee' part applies to all expenses. And, no, it doesn't prevent you from entering the expense but it will then make you the first approver (in the US--apparently it works differently in the UK at least) and then there can only be one other approver. If the auditor audits this expense (which is likely because the audit software will flag it as an recommended expense to inspect) this will be an audit exception because by policy you aren't supposed to sign or approve an expense where you are the payee.

[jdlessley]

The 'payee' part applies to all expenses.

That is partially true . Until the system accounts for all cases in which a submitter is the payee it would prevent the exceptions necessary for special circumstances. There is one obvious situation that should not prevent a submitter from being the payee. This is when the payment method is a paper check. As long as the signers of the check are not the payee then submitter as the payee should not be prevented. I have submitted a payment for myself for a check payment with two other check signatories and this was acceptable, as well it should be. I would expect the system to prevent an EFT payment in the event that the submitter is the payee. In the past this has not been the case and the system would let the payment be processed. I submitted feedback on this quite some time ago as it appeared to be a bug . If the situation described by sandlh@frontier.com was for an EFT then I expect they have updated the system. I tested the system up to, but not, clicking the Save button and all appeared as though it would be accepted. I hope the transaction would not be completed but blocked after clicking the Save button.

I agree that even if the system allows a submitter to be an approver for an EFT payment then someone else should submit the payment request on behalf of the payee. I am just not certain that the system has been changed/updated.

[eblood66]

There is one obvious situation that should not prevent a submitter from being the payee. This is when the payment method is a paper check. As long as the signers of the check are not the payee then submitter as the payee should not be prevented.

Agreed. My comments only really apply to EFT transactions. Check are handled differently (especially if you don't upload documentation).

[jonesrk]

I would expect the system to prevent an EFT payment in the event that the submitter is the payee.

I think it would be better if it would let there be an EFT payment when the submitter is the payee, but not count the submitter as an approver.