What is being tested
Was a customer advance moved to another project under documented authority? The boundary for this investigation is customer advance transferred between projects. Begin with the disputed transaction or population, then identify which advance receipt establishes the observed position and which transfer instruction supports the comparison. A difference in totals should not replace this question.
Evidence: advance receipt
For customer advance transferred between projects, advance receipt must be linked to transfer instruction. Preserve the transaction identity, measured or accepted quantity and who confirmed the event. Distinguish physical evidence from later system posting. Where condition affects acceptance, retain the authorized disposition instead of using a raw observation as an automatic commercial conclusion.
Evidence: transfer instruction
For customer advance transferred between projects, transfer instruction must be linked to project agreement. Preserve the authorized sender, accepted scope and event timestamp. Distinguish a request from its acceptance and check whether the approver had authority for this change. Later approval should remain visible as a separate event rather than rewrite the original sequence.
Evidence: project agreement
For customer advance transferred between projects, project agreement must be linked to customer ledger. Retain the applicable wording, effective dates and scope of covered transactions. Identify the event or population that controls the calculation. Do not silently replace a contractual definition with a dashboard label, customary practice or the latest published rule.
Evidence: customer ledger
For customer advance transferred between projects, customer ledger must be linked to advance receipt. Use the opening position, dated movements and closing position together. Preserve the distinction between requested, authorized and posted changes. The reconciliation should explain how the source item moved through the account, not simply assert that the final total agrees.
Reconciliation logic
Separate original deposit ownership from approved project allocation and subsequent invoicing. Build the comparison at the level identified by advance receipt and retain the governing version from transfer instruction. Show intermediate classifications and excluded items separately; a net total can hide an unsupported component or a correctly offset correction.
Exception conditions
An advance may be restricted to the original project. Treat the item as an unresolved exception only when the comparison described here cannot be supported by the linked advance receipt, transfer instruction, project agreement, customer ledger. Document the conflicting input or rule. A plausible operational explanation requires validation, but it should not be discarded to maximize an apparent financial difference.
Human review and outcome
Treasury and project finance validate transfer authority. Retain an advance allocation disposition without assuming transfer permission. Keep the reviewer's reason and source references with that disposition. A supported correction should be followed to the revised record or settlement; an accepted explanation can close the question with no adjustment. Missing authority or evidence should remain an open task rather than a confirmed recovery.
Limitations and processing boundary
No message, payment demand or cash application should be triggered solely by an unresolved comparison. The native full finding producer is not complete. Receipt ownership, settlement authority and the final ledger state require human validation. In this scenario, absence of advance receipt or transfer instruction limits whether the comparison can be completed. The review method describes what people should validate, not a promise that AuditRes automatically detects or executes this specific outcome.
AuditRes pathway
Discuss customer advance transferred between projects in the AR/Collections workspace. Review current plans, the shared platform and secure evidence requirements; use the existing contact path to confirm the sources and validation this scope requires.
AuditRes AR/Collections: Available for onboarding. Public previews use synthetic demonstration data; production processing remains gated until applicable customer sources and authoritative processors are connected and validated.
Neighboring financial questions
- Customer payment chargebacks in collections queues
- Customer duplicate remittance split-bank receipts
- Customer payment sender differs from contracted debtor
- Receivables credit issued after customer settlement
AR/Collections resource hub · All guides in this evidence collection