Summary: | Claim return doesn't refund lost item charge when MarkLostItemsAsReturned includes "When marking an item as a return claim" and "Refund lost item fee" is on | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Koha | Reporter: | Lisette Scheer <lisette> |
Component: | Circulation | Assignee: | Matt Blenkinsop <matt.blenkinsop> |
Status: | Needs documenting --- | QA Contact: | Lucas Gass (lukeg) <lucas> |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 - low | CC: | blawlor, clackman, emily.lamancusa, gmcharlt, kebliss, kkrueger, kyle.m.hall, laura, lucas, martin.renvoize, mspinney, mteal |
Version: | Main | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
See Also: | https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=27919 | ||
GIT URL: | Change sponsored?: | --- | |
Patch complexity: | Small patch | Documentation contact: | |
Documentation submission: | Text to go in the release notes: |
This allows to refund the lost charge when a return claim is resolved. For this a new checkbox labelled 'Refund previous lost fee' is added to the return claim modal.
**Sponsored by** *ByWater Solutions* and *Cuyahoga County Public Library*
|
|
Version(s) released in: |
24.11.00
|
Circulation function: | |
Bug Depends on: | 27919 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 39094 | ||
Attachments: |
Bug 33292: Add a checkbox to refund a lost fee on return claim
Bug 33292: Add logic to handle refunding a lost fee Bug 33292: Add unit tests Bug 33292: Add unit tests Popup Refund Fee Account Lines Claims Return Refund Bug 33292: Add a checkbox to refund a lost fee on return claim Bug 33292: Add logic to handle refunding a lost fee Bug 33292: Add unit tests |
Description
Lisette Scheer
2023-03-21 14:42:45 UTC
"Having the option to refund the lost fee on claim would be helpful for many libraries." I agree with Lisette, ALL of our libraries would appreciate this. +1 I still agree with Lisette. I have written a patch for this bug but I'm holding off submitting it until a way forward is agreed for bug 27919, currently awaiting QA Created attachment 171966 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add a checkbox to refund a lost fee on return claim Created attachment 171967 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add logic to handle refunding a lost fee This patch allows the return claims endpoint to handle the refunding of a lost fee for the item if the checkbox is checked Created attachment 171968 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add unit tests Test plan: 1) In KTD, set ClaimReturnedLostValue to any value 2) Checkout an item to a patron 3) Add a manual invoice to that patron's account against that item barcode 4) In the patron's checkouts table, click the Claim returned button 5) The checkbox will have the option to "Refund previous lost fee" 6) Tick this box and submit 7) Have a look at the patron's transactions. There will now be a new line refunding the lost fee from step 3 8) Run the unit tests prove t/db_dependent/Circulation/ReturnClaims.t prove t/db_dependent/api/v1/return_claims.t Do you happen to have any partners keen to test this for us Lisette? If this can be done in a sandbox rather than KTD, I could give it a try. Steps 1 - 7 should be fine to run in a sandbox (sandboxes are generally just KTD instances) What would happen with step 8 then? That could be covered at QA stage or we can ask someone to add another sign-off line for the tests. If you're happy to do steps 1 - 7 it would be good to prove the concept works :) Created attachment 172269 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add unit tests Test plan: 1) In KTD, set ClaimReturnedLostValue to any value 2) Checkout an item to a patron 3) Add a manual invoice to that patron's account against that item barcode 4) In the patron's checkouts table, click the Claim returned button 5) The checkbox will have the option to "Refund previous lost fee" 6) Tick this box and submit 7) Have a look at the patron's transactions. There will now be a new line refunding the lost fee from step 3 8) Run the unit tests prove t/db_dependent/Circulation/ReturnClaims.t prove t/db_dependent/api/v1/return_claims.t Signed-off-by: Kristi Krueger <kkrueger@cuyahogalibrary.org> Test plan: 1) In KTD, set ClaimReturnedLostValue to any value -- I Used 'Lost' 2) Checkout an item to a patron -- I used 39999000012392 3) Add a manual invoice to that patron's account against that item barcode I used patron with card number 23529000318858 and added a 1.50 charge. 4) In the patron's checkouts table, click the Claim returned button 5) The checkbox will have the option to "Refund previous lost fee" 6) Tick this box and submit 7) Have a look at the patron's transactions. There will now be a new line refunding the lost fee from step 3 This all worked as expected. Screenshots of the "refund previous lost fee" popup and the account lines will be attached. Created attachment 172270 [details]
Popup Refund Fee
Shows popup window for refund previous lost fee option on claims return.
Created attachment 172271 [details]
Account Lines Claims Return Refund
Shows the account line added when fee is refunded on claims return.
Created attachment 172673 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add a checkbox to refund a lost fee on return claim Signed-off-by: Lucas Gass <lucas@bywatersolutions.com> Created attachment 172674 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add logic to handle refunding a lost fee This patch allows the return claims endpoint to handle the refunding of a lost fee for the item if the checkbox is checked Signed-off-by: Lucas Gass <lucas@bywatersolutions.com> Created attachment 172675 [details] [review] Bug 33292: Add unit tests Test plan: 1) In KTD, set ClaimReturnedLostValue to any value 2) Checkout an item to a patron 3) Add a manual invoice to that patron's account against that item barcode 4) In the patron's checkouts table, click the Claim returned button 5) The checkbox will have the option to "Refund previous lost fee" 6) Tick this box and submit 7) Have a look at the patron's transactions. There will now be a new line refunding the lost fee from step 3 8) Run the unit tests prove t/db_dependent/Circulation/ReturnClaims.t prove t/db_dependent/api/v1/return_claims.t Signed-off-by: Kristi Krueger <kkrueger@cuyahogalibrary.org> Signed-off-by: Lucas Gass <lucas@bywatersolutions.com> Should this be "normal" instead of "enhancement"? Pushed for 24.11! Well done everyone, thank you! Enhancement, no 24.05.x backport |