Ritu Mehta
My feedback
57 results found
-
14 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
64 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
70 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
38 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
37 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
121 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
64 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
23 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
65 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
57 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
42 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
110 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
19 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
141 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
165 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
25 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
68 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
142 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
237 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
-
186 votes
Ritu Mehta supported this idea ·
Not only all internal notes are lost in this process, but also the "note to vendor". In standing orders, this field often contains vital information for the vendor without which the vendor will need to check back or will deliver the wrong volumes.
Because I coudn't find clear documentation about this behaviour, I wasn't even aware of the closing and creation of a new PO line. That's why I updated the existing PO line with a new note to vendor and then changed the vendor and sent it. Only afterwards I discovered that the vendor received this order without indication from which volume onwards we want to order the title.