Ritu Mehta
My feedback
55 results found
-
28 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
76 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
72 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
41 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
117 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
21 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
25 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
80 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
146 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
236 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
37 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
52 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
8 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
43 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
85 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
84 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
117 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
182 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
68 votes
Ritu Mehta
supported this idea
·
-
107 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.