Bug ID: 19919
Summary: Writing off a Lost Item Fee marks as "Paid for by
Change sponsored?: ---
Priority: P5 - low
Component: Fines and fees
Assignee: [hidden email] Reporter: [hidden email] QA Contact: [hidden email]
A replacement copy was ordered for an item that was "long lost overdue" on a
The librarian wanted the old copy deleted from the system to keep the record
We checked in the item, marked it as lost, and then wrote off the fee
associated with the item. Finally we reapplied the fee manually, no longer
associated with the item.
We noticed that at the point of the write off, the item gets a line that says
paid for by (Patron name and barcode) DATE TIME.
This also happens if the book is checked in and no longer marked as lost (say
it was returned by the borrower so we wrote off the lost item fee.)
The borrower has not paid for the book in either situation.
So when a fine of type L or Rep is paid, the line will be added to
Of course this is problematic in multiple ways:
- the whole note is untranslatable
- we store firstname surname and not the borrowernumber, which can lead to
confusion with common names.
- we store a badly formatted date (note the missing leading zeros) in ISO
We could fix the behaviour and only add the note for payments (not write offs).
But maybe we should rethink the whole thing? Is this information really helpful
when you can get it from the cleaned up accountlines and account_offsets table
now in a clean way?
--- Comment #6 from Katrin Fischer <[hidden email]> ---
(In reply to Magnus Enger from comment #5)
> Storing this info on the item level is also problematic in light of GDPR.
> Can anyone describe a use case for storing this info in items.paidfor?
Good point, totally agree. We should not store patron information like names in
item data ever, there is too much risk in exporting the data in some way or
making it accidentally visible in the OPAC.