[HOLD for payment 2024-02-26] IOU - Merchant error remains when Admin pay the request

[kbecciv]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 1.4.41.1
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: n
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4312656
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

1. As Employee start the request money flow > "Scan" receipt from Workspace chat
2. Upload a blurry receipt
3. Complete the money request flow
4. Wait for request to fail
5. Manually edit the amount field
6. Note that Merchant have red dot on both sides (Employee and Admin)
7. As Admin pay the request
8. As Admin take a note of Merchant field

Expected Result:

Red dot should disappear from Merchant field since request is payed

Actual Result:

Merchant error remains on Admin's side

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6379476_1707922828980.Gravar__2294.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

[github-actions]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open `StagingDeployCash` deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @AndrewGable (Engineering), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[kbecciv]

We think that this bug might be related #wave6-collect-submitters
CC @greg-schroeder

[AndrewGable]

Going to look and see if anything changed with violations recently cc @cead22

[AndrewGable]

Wondering if this PR introduced this regression: #34303

[AndrewGable]

@trevor-coleman confirmed he thinks this is from the PR (internal Slack), discussing next steps there

[AndrewGable]

@allroundexperts is reviewing as C+, so assigning them too

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.42-5 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix(Violations): fix behaviour of merchant errors #36550

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-02-26. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @allroundexperts requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[melvin-bot]

Issue is ready for payment but no BZ is assigned. @mallenexpensify you are the lucky winner! Please verify the payment summary looks correct and complete the checklist. Thanks!

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @allroundexperts owed $500 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@mallenexpensify)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants//hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[mallenexpensify]

Contributor+: @allroundexperts owed $500 via NewDot.

@allroundexperts , do we need to create or update a regression test for this? It looks like this issue was a regression so maybe it was caught by QA running an existing test?

[allroundexperts]

@mallenexpensify I can't see this test case specifically listed in #34303. Can you check if this exists in test rail? If not, we can create one. The steps in the OP should suffice.

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 approved for @allroundexperts based on summary above.

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @allroundexperts , I created one and mentioned that I wasn't sure if it was needed, so QA will check
https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/374976