How to fix improperly auto assigned data in bank feeds? Help!

Hi AldrinS.  Thank you for your answer.  I am not going to pretend that I have the know how to technically tell you how to solve this problem, but I can tell you exactly what the problem is, and what needs to be done to solve it.  There is one thing I want to make clear.  This problem is not with the QB program itself or any updates that have been made to it.  This problem is 100% a problem with how Chase Bank reports check deposits made via their Mobile Deposit System.

There are several factors at play in why this problem exists and the solution is not as easy as it should be due to multiple factors, primarily being the inability of OCR software to consistently and accurately interpret the eccentricities of human handwriting.  Let me explain.

Q: Why does Chase report mobile check deposits the way they do?

 A: Because when making a check deposit through the mobile deposit system, Chase bank only requires the user to input the amount of the check and take a physical picture of the check.  

So the only DIGITAL data that is available in a mobile deposit is the amount.  The rest of the critical data (that is needed by QB) is contained on the raster image (picture) of the physical check.  This information is not in digital format is unavailable to be processed and included in the Chase Bank report of the deposit.  This is why chase bank report all mobile deposits as the same thing and they all look like this screenshot below.

Now notice in this screenshot the little check icon to the left of the REMOTE ONLINE DEPOSIT #1.  That icon is live and can be clicked to see the actual check raster image.  So we see in this example that the only useful digital data is that which was input by the human that made the deposit, that being the Amount of the deposit, and since no OCR software can reliably interpret human hand writing, that raster image of the check is  for human benefit alone and is not usable as digital data.  This is why all Chase reports all mobile deposits at the same thing.  Since QB needs a "Unique Identifier" to be able to differentiate one deposit from another and to properly assign that deposit to the correct account, QB has no way to know who these deposits came from, since they come from the same PPayor, which is; REMOTE ONLINE DEPOSITE #1.

Okay, so now we understand the problem.  What is the solution? Well, the solution can be simple or complex, depending on what the end QB user needs.  The simple solution is for Chase to require the person making the mobile deposit system to enter the Name of Payor of the check at minimum.  This NAME data would then be readily available to report with the deposit.  In this case, a Chase deposit report might look like this:

REMOTE ONLINE DEPOSITE FROM: JANE DOE                               $40

REMOTE ONLINE DEPOSIT FROM: JOHN HANCOCK                     $100

So when QB imported these transactions, it could then create a Name Association Rule that says that: REMOTE ONLINE DEPOSITE FROM: JANE DOE   = Customer: Jane Doe; and then it could automatically allocate these deposit transactions to the proper customer account.  

As I said, that is the simple solution, but not a complete solution.  There are two critical pieces of data that are still needed to properly report a customer check that would still not be in this simple system I outlined above.  These are; the Check Number and the Date the Check was written.  Banks report when a check was deposited, not when it was written.  Anyone that has entered a Sales Receipt for a check payment in QB knows that you are required to enter the Sale Date and the Check Number.  So you might think that the solution to this is simply to require the human making the deposit to enter this data, but that will not work, but then the Chase deposit report would end up looking something like this:

REMOTE ONLINE DEPOSIT FROM: JANE DOE, DATE: 01/10/2019, CHK# 1234        $40

This is what could be called a CUSTOM Non-repeatable Unique Identifier.  This would be horrible for QB would because, since the date and the check number would be different for each deposit,  QB would see each deposit for Jane Doe as being a New Customer and you would have to create a new name association rule for each deposit, thereby subverting the automation process and adding more work to import the chase web connect file.  Plus, I doubt that Chase bank would be willing to force their customer to have to input all that extra data to make a mobile deposit anyways.

The other more complex solution is for the two departments within Chase Bank to work together; these are the Quickbooks Services Department and the Debt Collection and Reporting Department.  When a check is deposited, it authorizes Bank 1 to access the information from the Payor's account from Bank 2.  All that Chase (Bank ) needs to do is instruct the department that collects the money from Bank 2, to funnel the data like Payor's Name and Check Number and Date from Bank 2 over to the Reporting department to be associated QB web connect services in a format that can be used by QB.  This would be extremely complex and would require the creation of custom advanced algorithms to accomplish. 

Now you might be asking, "How is this Intuits problem to fix?"  Well, because Intuit is the one who bears the responsibility to TELL Chase what information it needs to include in its QB services to make them compatible for QB customers. Intuit is the one who knows what QB needs and how it needs to be formatted.  Intuit also needs to make it as easy as possible for all banks to provide this data in a manner that is readily available and usable to the QB program.  In short, Inuit is the one that is setting the STANDARD and they need to make sure that banks know what that STANDARD is.  But not only that, Inuit needs to make sure banks MEET that standard.  Inuit needs to tell banks that " If their services DO NOT meet QB standards, they CANNOT offer QB services."  Basically, "We make the rules, and if you want to play the game, you have to play by our rules."

Bottom line.  Intuit makes billions selling an accounting software that is supposed to make life easier than doing things the old fashion way.  Chase bank makes billions selling Quickbooks services to their customers.  There is no reason, these two giant multi-billion dollar companies should ever not be talking to each other to work out these problems for the benefit of their customers.

But here is what I no from using Quickbooks for 20 years now.  I have yet to find a single bank that truly offered a fully compatible QB file.  Every bank I have tried has had worse or greater problems then this issue with Chase, and it 100% boils down to INTUITS lack of enforcement of any kind of standard upon banks to offer services for their software.  It is ultimately Inuits fault.