[Collect approvers] [$1000] Expense - Error appears when admin tries to pay a request without having approved it

[lanitochka17]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 1.4.28-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
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:

Pre-requisite: user must have created a collect workspace and
added a BA. With an employee account, create a request and submit it

1. As the admin on ND, navigate to the workspace chat with the employee
2. Click on the expense to go to report page
3. Click on "Pay with Expensify"

Expected Result:

It should be possible to pay the expense without problems
.

Actual Result:

Admin can not pay the expense without approving it first, an error message appears
Unexpected error, please try again later
An unexpected error ocurred. Please try again later

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

Bug6348754_1705769462013.bandicam_2024-01-19_18-11-16-153.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0130f77ed31ac8823b
• Upwork Job ID: 1748765068058488832
• Last Price Increase: 2024-04-06

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0130f77ed31ac8823b

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @abdulrahuman5196 (External)

[lanitochka17]

We think that this bug might be related to #wave7.
CC @RachCHopkins

[promisingcoder]

Proposal
Problem Statement:
In the application, an admin cannot pay an expense without first approving it. This issue arises during the execution of the confirm function in the MoneyRequestConfirmationList component. The function terminates early if the selectedParticipants array is empty, which is often the case for admin users who are processing the payment but are not participants in the traditional sense.

Root Cause Analysis:
The root cause lies in the conditional check within the confirm function:

if (_.isEmpty(selectedParticipants)) {
return;
}
This condition is designed to prevent the progression of the payment process if no participants are selected. However, in the context of an admin user, this check is too restrictive, as the admin is not a participant but still needs to initiate the payment.

Proposed Solution:
The solution involves modifying the conditional check to accommodate admin users. This can be done by introducing an additional state or prop to indicate whether the current user is an admin. Based on this, the function can bypass the participant check for admins.

Updated Code:

Introduce an Admin Flag: Add a new state or prop to the component to indicate whether the user is an admin. For simplicity, let's assume a prop isAdmin is passed to the component.

Modify the Conditional Check:
Update the condition in the confirm function to bypass the participant check if the user is an admin.

const confirm = useCallback(
(paymentMethod) => {
if (!props.isAdmin && _.isEmpty(selectedParticipants)) {
return;
}

    // ...rest of the function
},
[
    // ...dependencies
],

);
Rationale:
This modification ensures that the payment process is not unnecessarily halted for admin users. By checking the isAdmin flag, the function can appropriately handle scenarios where an admin needs to make a payment without being a participant. This change is targeted and should not cause regressions in other parts of the application, as it specifically addresses the admin scenario. Additionally, it aligns with the general expectation that admins have different permissions and capabilities compared to regular users.

Testing Considerations:
Post-implementation, thorough testing is required to ensure the payment process works correctly for both admin and non-admin users. This includes testing various scenarios and ensuring that the application's behavior remains consistent and as expected.

[abdulrahuman5196]

Will check this issue in my morning.

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[mallenexpensify]

@abdulrahuman5196 please review the above. @RachCHopkins I agree these seems to fit with Wave 7 so I've added to the project there. Let me know if you disagree.

[abdulrahuman5196]

Reviewing now

[abdulrahuman5196]

@promisingcoder Could you kindly update the proposal as per the proposal template - https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Expensify/App/main/contributingGuides/PROPOSAL_TEMPLATE.md

Meanwhile I did a high level check. Could you kindly provide more information on how MoneyRequestConfirmationList is related to the action taken on the SettlementButton ?

[abdulrahuman5196]

@mallenexpensify Could you kindly provide information on how to create this pre-requisite?

Pre-requisite: user must have created a collect workspace and
added a BA. With an employee account, create a request and submit it

[promisingcoder]

@abdulrahuman5196
MoneyRequestConfirmationList: This is a list that shows all the participants involved in a money request. It also handles the confirmation of the request.

SettlementButton: This is a button that, when pressed, triggers the payment process. It's used within the MoneyRequestConfirmationList component.

The action of pressing the SettlementButton triggers a function called confirm in the MoneyRequestConfirmationList component. This function checks if there are any selected participants and if a payment method is provided. If these conditions are met, it sets a state called didConfirm to true and calls another function, onSendMoney, with the selected payment method as an argument.

The proposal suggests modifying the confirm function to accommodate admin users who need to confirm payments but are not participants in the traditional sense. Currently, the confirm function terminates early if the selectedParticipants array is empty, which is often the case for admin users. By introducing an additional check for admin users in the confirm function, the SettlementButton can successfully trigger the payment process even when the user is an admin.

So, in simple terms, the SettlementButton starts the action that the confirm function in the MoneyRequestConfirmationList component carries out. The proposed changes aim to make sure that this process works correctly for all users, including admins.

[mallenexpensify]

Pre-requisite: user must have created a collect workspace and
added a BA. With an employee account, create a request and submit it

@abdulrahuman5196 , most of that can be done view OldDot, expensify.com. The part I'm unsure about is 'added a BA` (which I'm assuming is Bank Account) Ah ha, looks like this should work
https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1706551410056249?thread_ts=1706541901.752409&cid=C01GTK53T8Q

[abdulrahuman5196]

Will check on the old dot setup in my morning

[melvin-bot]

@mallenexpensify @abdulrahuman5196 this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[abdulrahuman5196]

Still having trouble with setup, will try today or reach out in slack

[trjExpensify]

Why's this one held still? The linked issue is ready for payment tomorrow?

[mallenexpensify]

Unsure @trjExpensify . My process for held issues is to hover over the link to see if it's open or closed. Musta misread it for this one.

Taking off hold, Added Retest-weekly

[melvin-bot]

@mallenexpensify, @abdulrahuman5196 Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[mallenexpensify]

Waiting on the retest.

[mallenexpensify]

Waiting on retest

[abdulrahuman5196]

waiting on retest

[mvtglobally]

Issue is reproducible during KI retests.

1712169548259.cc.mp4

[mallenexpensify]

Just tried to reproduce and can't. @abdulrahuman5196 , can you please try? I could be holding something wrong but I def have a bank account connected on a collect workspace.
https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/22508304/fd6888f4-e2cc-4f24-b3f5-8cb3e3e1f8a4

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

@mallenexpensify, @abdulrahuman5196 Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[abdulrahuman5196]

Issue is reproducible during KI retests.
1712169548259.cc.mp4

Actually, Don't understand this reproduced video.
I don't see any errors here? @mvtglobally

[mallenexpensify]

Unable to reproduce again. This issue is a few months old and we've had many changes. If we encounter it again, someone can create a new issue with repro steps.