Release documentation - P&C Enhancements and requests

Problem:
When i navigate with the right or left buttons on the keyboard in Base company/Business partner in mass pairing order, the cursor jumps out of the field

Solution:
When the user navigates right or left curser in Base company field and Business partner field in mass pairing order, System should work accordingly i.e., it goes right or left as per the user give command (<,>). It does not select the view business partner button.

Problem:
Special Acceptance Total Amount Booked Net issue.

The booking happened correctly. However, when it is being displayed on the screen, the Total Net amount booked is being shown same as Gross. Which is incorrect.

Solution:
Precondition-  System parameter 'Default booking to be split per accounting classification Percent'< base company specific settings< classification rule 1, is selected, Total of split % of all the accounting classifications defined under the Business is 100% and Deduction condition defined under the contract.

When special acceptance premium (gross & net), being booked, after booking, the 'Total Amount booked' (Gross & Net) should display the correct amounts.

Problem:
Slow Performance when filtering and sorting details on the Business Ledger.

Solution:
Improve the Filtering & Sorting mechanism when Sorting Specifications are defined.

Problem:
General Ledger Balance Revaluation abends when executed multiple times for the same booking year and Period with Primary Key constraint.

Solution:
When the General Ledger Balance Revaluation is started multiple times with the same selection criteria (booking year and period), then instead of system abending with the primary key constraint, system should ignore those rows where it tries to insert a duplicate row and should only append the rows which are new.
 

Problem:
Replacement value with New Amount 0 is not working when importing TW

When we manually create a booking online with any amount equal to or more than zero system correctly calculates the Amount/ New Amount. However, this is producing wrong amounts when we upload through spreadsheet. 

Solution:
When importing Technical worksheet through spreadsheet with 'New Amount' (whether Zero or any other value), the amount should be calculated and booked properly as in the same way it works online. 

Amount = New Amount - Previously Booked Amount

Example 1 :

Previously booked amount :  -3000

New Amount : 0

Amount should be  : 3000

Example 2 :

Previously booked amount : -2000

New Amount : -3000

Amount : -1000

Problem:
Legal Reporting Unit column is not displayed in the Business Partner Ledger when System parameter: Legal Reporting Unit Category is selected with Reporting Unit.

Solution:
Display Logic:

Ensure the Legal Reporting Unit column is always visible in the Business Partner Ledger when the parameter 'Legal Reporting Unit Category' is selected with Reporting Unit is enabled. The visibility of the column should not depend on the parameter 'Balance Grouping across Base Companies/Legal Reporting Units Not Allowed'.

Value Population Logic:

Populate the Legal Reporting Unit column values for Settlement Balance Group balance types only when the parameter 'Balance Grouping across Base Companies/Legal Reporting Units Not Allowed' is enabled

Problem:
Wrong Profit Commission Calculation bookings generated when calculated Profit Commission is negative.

Solution:
When total Profit Commission is calculated as negative, system should correctly assign the Scope of Cover to the reversed Profit Commission balance details which will make the total Profit Commission amount equals zero.

Problem:
When System parameter 'Require complete registration' is checked under Business > Condition > miscellaneous And Parameter 'Book Instalments automatically when setting registration complete' flag selected, the AC0227 information message appears more than one time upon worksheet/s creation.

Solution:
When the instalments booked whether through automatic booking with the above parameters or by manually, in any case, the AC0227 information message should appear only once upon worksheet/s creation.

Problem:
Wrong as original generated when change retroceded percent to Proportional Outward Cedent's Contract from protection of Non-Prop OCC

Solution:
When changing the retroceded share of proportional protection from Non-Proportional Outward Cedent's Contract (OCC) to Proportional OCC, and only when system parameter 'Proportional Protection Assignment on Non-prop OCC in use ' is selected but 'Keep Sign from Non-prop OCC' is unselected, system should correctly calculate the adjustment amounts in Original Currency of the OCC that has been changed retroceded share, and should not affect bookings in Original Currency of other OCCs in the Proportional protection.

Problem:
Bug 2440995: Performance Issue with BPL for BUS Partner 127053

Solution:
When loading balances in BPL, additional data should only be loaded to aid the menu options for the currently selected balance and it should not load the Worksheet data for every balance row.

Problem:
Retrocession Calculation Order for Partner Commutation Crash

Solution:
System should not abend when calculating Portfolio as Reserve and Deposits through Retrocession Calculation Order after commutation calculation has done in the same Accounting Period.

Problem:
Performance Issue during Retrocession Calculation Order Execution

Solution:
The SicsAccountingOrderAbstractReacEngineImpl.initializeClassificationsFor needs to be optimized, especially in fetching the target AC.

Problem:
Can't trigger retrocession calculation order for OCC auto booking when copy worksheets from IAB

Solution:
When a worksheet is closed on an Assumed Business and this is protected by one or more proportional treaty OCCs, and if any of these OCCs have the flag 'Automatic Booking for OCC ORP' selected, the system must automatically create and run a Retrocession Calculation order for this/these OCCs, independent if the worksheet is created manually or copy from the existing worksheets.
 

Problem:
Wrong Due Dates of newer Accounting Periods when Book Future Due Items on RP is selected.

Solution:
When Book Future Due Items on RP is selected and Keep Due Date as Original is unselected, the bookings allocated to a newer Account should have the Due Date allocated according to the ‘Acct as of ’ date of the new account.

Problem:
System crash when reversing Bank Charges Remittance balance from Business Partner Ledger

Solution:
When reversing bank charges remittance worksheet balance the System should not abend, instead, it should reverse the bank charges remittance worksheet as it was working in earlier versions.

Problem:
Abend when start to type a name of the insured in Original responsible partner column on Technical worksheet.

Solution:
When any thing typed in column 'Original responsible partner' on Technical worksheet, the system should not abend. Instead, it should list the matching names for selection. if no match, still it should show as blank.

Problem:
Inconsistency of the Message shown when changes in 'PL' conditions

Solution:
1. The Old message BS00269 body to be restored as it was earlier as “The Insured Period being modified has bookings. Do you want to continue?' and it should be triggered for all condition changes except “Deduction Condition”, subject to the satisfaction of existing trigging conditions.
2. A new message ID to be be created with body “The Insured Period being modified has bookings. Future bookings on this Insured Period, including reversal of existing bookings, will use the current updated deduction conditions. You should therefore consider to reverse the existing bookings before the deductions are changed. Do you want to continue anyway?' and to be triggered if any changes happened in Deduction Condition, subject to the satisfaction of existing trigging conditions in similar way as of BS00269.
3. The above two messages should not be restricted to any type/Level of Business. It is applicable to all types/Levels of business.

Problem:
Annulled Pairings missing on FC Revaluation

Solution:
When Annulling of pairing takes place, the Current Amount 1, Previous Amount 1, Current Amount 2 and Previous Amount 2 are to be displayed for the FC revaluation row of such annulling for both FC1 and FC2 as the case may be.

Problem:
Performance issues with Recovery Order for Protection Program when fetching large amount of claim light details.

Solution:
Changes needed in methods which handles claim light details in Recovery Calculation for Protection Program

Problem:
API retrieveObject can't extract 'Balance signature notes' related to balances of Worksheets.

Solution:
Domain retrieval APIs for Worksheets / balances, if any signature notes attached to the balances, should retrieve and show such Signature notes as well on the response

Problem:
Accounting Year and Accounting Period (Code) objects are taking more time to get the List of values at prompt level.

Solution:
Need to adjust the LOV SQL of the objects Accounting Year and Accounting Period (Code) to get the values from table BOAC_DIM_TIME instead of view V_BOAC_PC_FACT.

Problem:
Prod-Test testing - Can't understand where the Unsettled Functional Amounts is picked from as it is picking up wrong data.

Solution:
Modify the SQL definitions of the objects - Detail Amount Unsettled (Func), Detail Amount Unsettled (Func2), Detail Amount Settled (Func) & Detail Amount Settled (Func2) under the folder Accounting Information> Detail> Detail (Functional) and remove the brackets as it is given below:

--Detail Amount Unsettled (Func) should change to look like this

SUM(CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_ESTIMATE = 'Y' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_1 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'N' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_1 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'Y' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_1 * CASE WHEN V_DETAIL_BOAC_STL_PAIR.UNSETTLED_AMT1 IS NULL THEN V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT ELSE V_DETAIL_BOAC_STL_PAIR.UNSETTLED_AMT1 END / CASE WHEN V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT = 0.00 THEN 1 ELSE V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT END END)

--Detail Amount Unsettled (Func2) 

SUM(CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_ESTIMATE = 'Y' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_2 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'N' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_2 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'Y' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_2 * CASE WHEN V_DETAIL_BOAC_STL_PAIR.UNSETTLED_AMT1 IS NULL THEN V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT ELSE V_DETAIL_BOAC_STL_PAIR.UNSETTLED_AMT1 END / CASE WHEN V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT = 0.00 THEN 1 ELSE V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT END END)

--Detail Amount Settled (Func)

SUM(CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_ESTIMATE = 'Y' THEN 0.00 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'N' THEN 0.00 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'Y' THEN COALESCE(CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'Y' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_1 END,0.00) * V_DETAIL_BOAC_STL_PAIR.SETTLED_AMT1 * V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_1 / CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.AMOUNT = 0.00 THEN 1 ELSE V_BOAC_PC_FACT.AMOUNT END / CASE WHEN V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT = 0.00 THEN 1 ELSE V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT END END )

--Detail Amount Settled (Func2)

SUM(CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_ESTIMATE = 'Y' THEN 0.00 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'N' THEN 0.00 WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'Y' THEN COALESCE(CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.IS_LIQUID = 'Y' THEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_2 END,0.00) * V_DETAIL_BOAC_STL_PAIR.SETTLED_AMT1 * V_BOAC_PC_FACT.FUNC_CURR_AMOUNT_2 / CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.AMOUNT = 0.00 THEN 1 ELSE V_BOAC_PC_FACT.AMOUNT END / CASE WHEN V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT = 0.00 THEN 1 ELSE V_DETAIL_BALANCE.LEDGER_BAL_ORG_AMT END END )

Problem:
System Parameter (Accounting>P&C Miscellaneous ): 'Included VAT Codes in Reinstatement Balance' not working as expected. Even though this parameter is not selected, still the system grouping Reinstatement premium & VAT on Reinstatement premium into the same balance.

Solution:
System Parameter (Accounting>P&C Miscellaneous ): 'Included VAT Codes in Reinstatement Balance' should work as intended.

Selected: When the ‘Use VAT Calculation’ flag is activated on the business and the balance split option “Reinstatement Premium” is selected on Claim Worksheet, for reinstatement premium and its related VAT bookings, the amounts are grouped into the same balance.

Cleared: When the ‘Use VAT Calculation’ flag is activated on the business and the balance split option “Reinstatement Premium” is selected on Claim Worksheet, the reinstatement premium becomes a separated balance, and the VAT on reinstatement related bookings are grouped into other balance.

Problem:
Bug 2553144: Generate Payment Request and Create Remittance for Manual Creation incorrect Due Date

Solution:
Precondition : System Parameters :

• Accounting > Remittance >Remittance Properties > “Prepopulate Due Date/Value Date for Remittance Creation” is ON
• Accounting > Remittance >Remittance Properties > 'Remittance creation Date plus no of days in future' is ON and “Remittance Creation date plus number of days in future” is set to some number of days.

When the above conditions are met, while a paid remittance worksheet opened for creation, regardless of the option whether through 'Make New Remittance' or 'Generate Payment Request', the Value and Due dates to be calculated as per the predefined number of days as set in the above parameter and appropriate resultant date should be set and shown as Value & Due Dates on the Paid RW.

This behavior should be same for both cases whether the Paid RW is being created through Single TW or through a SBG.

Problem:
API retrieveObject can't extract 'Direction field' related

Solution:
When calling retrieveObject with different references of Remittance worksheet, the response message should include level of business indicator 'Direction' information as well.

Problem:
MGAAP Accounting Order does not book correct figures when Order have MCOB selected. 

When we select MCOB on the order and run the order again with same optio. The order generated a new worksheet with suspicious figures that should not have been generated - Error. 

Solution:
We need to check in the system, why multi gaap accounting order create the worksheet again for accural and estimation bookings when we run the order with the same selection and the same MCOB.

If it is not intended, we must make the system work as it does when we do not select the MCOB. This means that the order should only generate the worksheet with the correct figures based on their Spit Ratio (Accounting Classification percentage).

Problem:
When using asterisk * as a wild card symbol in front of a search value, e.g. Business Identifier in Find Business, the system finds all items that contain part of this search value.  

Solution:
Whenever using asterisk * as a wild card symbol in front of the search value, the system should only list items ending with the search value entered. This applies to all searches where you can use the asterisk as a wild card, e.g. Find Business /ID/Type, Find Business Partner/ Name. 

Problem:
When renewing a business with instalments, e.g. a proportional facultative business, the system asks if you want to recalculate instalments even if there is no change in share.

Solution:
When renewing a business with existing premium instalments and there is no change in the share, system should not ask if you want to recalculate instalments. The system should just copy instalments from the previous insured period

Problem:
Share from Net of Gross is calculated on placements even if Net of Gross is not entered on the Outward Cedent's Contract

Solution:
When having values in Order in the Placement group box and then changing the Order value, the system should only recalculate 'From 100%' accordingly.

Problem:
When entering a Flat premium on the 2nd sub‑period of a multi‑year contract and choosing to copy it to other sub periods, the system gives an abend like message or abends.

Solution:
When a Multi Year Contract has sub periods with different Premium Types, e.g. Flat Rate and Fixed Rate, upon saving the Premium Condition (e.g. Flat Premium or Deposit Premium Condition), the system must check if other sub periods have the same Premium Type on the Main tab.
If other sub periods within the same overall period have the same premium type and on these no Premium Conditions (empty), the system should return BS0699 'Do you want to copy this condition to all sub periods within this multi year contract, where condition is not defined'. Answering 'Yes', the system should copy this premium condition to the relevant sub periods with the same Premium Type as source. Sub periods with another Premium Type does should receive no copy.

Workaround:
If you have problems entering the premium for period 01.05.2025-31.05.2026 because of this message, you can try the following:
Before changing the Period Premium, navigate to the next sub period and open the Premium and Limit Conditions of this.
Here, on the Main Tab, keep the Premium Type to Fixed, if this is what it should be, and save. If it should be changed to Premium Type Flat, then please do so and save.
Then, while still on this period, select the Instalment Tab and enter the Period Premium (or Deposit Premium) for this period.
Go back to period 01.05.2025-31.05.2026 and enter the Period Premium and save.

Problem:
Domain Retrieval:
When using object reference: SicsScopeOfCoverReference and referring to a specific amendment, system always retrieve details from the contract's last amendment

Solution:
Domain Retrieval/SicsScopeOfCoverReference 
When including <amendmentNumber> in the domain retrieval, system should retrieve details from the amendment number entered. This should happen also when reference object is SicsScopeOfCoverReference in the same way it correctly does when the reference object is e.g. SicsInsuredPeriodReference

Problem:
The system abends when selecting Add and Realize fac OCC if Type of Participation is missing.

Solution:
When selecting Add and Realize OCC Fac protection, and in the quick entry window, not selecting a Type of Participation, and  adding retrocessionaires with shares that do not total 100%, the system should not abend. Instead, after the error message about missing Type of participation, it should let me select the Type of Participation, before it gives the warning about the total share not being 100%, 

Problem:
When creating reinstatements, the option to delete one of them is not enabled.

Solution:
Allow deletion of a reinstatement also in edit mode

Workaround:
Change the condition input, and select NEW from menu, and container will update accordingly.

Problem:
When creating a new business and the Reinstatement Conditions page is part of the new business wizard, the system abends.

Solution:
If the Reinstatement Conditions page is part of the new business wizard or the renewal wizard, the system should allow the user to proceed without any abend. When selecting Next in the wizard, the system should show the Reinstatement Conditions page.

Problem:
When creating FGU claim worksheet and splitting per accounting classification and using row id 1 for both the system returns validation error AC0021 (it is not allowed to make several bookings for entry code xx in same balance).

Solution:
The system must be able to create the FGU worksheet with AC split using the same row id, as is possible online.

Problem:
The balance split on claim worksheet is incorrect.

Solution:
The balances should be generated using the Balance Split Options defined

Reinstatement group should contain entry codes in entry code sub category 'Reinstatement'.

Government Taxes should use corresponding entry code group and also requires that this payment task has been defined on business.

Claims should use corresponding entry code group and claim payment task must be defined.

Brokerage should use Brokerage entry code sub category, and brokerage payment task must be defined.

If option Split Entry Codes with Special FC1 Rules into separate balances “Split Entry Codes with special FC1 Calculation Rule in Separate Balance” is Checked and special Functional Currency 1 Exchange rules are defined for entry codes and those entry codes are used for creating booking details. In that case, balances will be split in accordance with these Functional Currency 1 Exchange Rules.

If an entry code is not included in a separate group it should be included in the 'rest' balance group.

Problem:
The system abends when creating a new claim - relational links corrupted

Solution:
When copying a claim which is linked to a Headline loss to a proportional fac IAB and changing the loss dates so that they no longer match the Headline Loss dates, the system should create the claim without the link to the Headline Loss.

Workaround:
Create the claim directly on the proportional fac business.

Problem:
AC0809 not triggered for Hard stop Claim Accuracy Validations 

Solution:
AC0809 should be triggered whenever a Claim Accuracy Category Option is selected which requires a mandatory Accuracy Validation Comment (as defined in Claim Accuracy General Setup -Claim accuracy system parameter)

Problem:
When processing a worksheet, SICS is not applying the per claim limit and is creating additional payments and reserves based on the aggregate limit. I have included some screen shots in the attached of what is happening and what should happen.

Claim in question is A000316067 and it is happening across all the layers of the claims program.'

From what I can see we have previous booking done via emessage but looks like this booking was not taken into consideration into the FGU Suggested distribution

Layer 1: 20m x 20m
1 RIP@100%
Agg Limit: $40m
IAB1076840 / IAB1076841

Per the FGU screen, the suggested distribution is correct but when I create a WS, the following happens,
It is putting in a payment of a further $20m, capping at the $40m agg limit.

Solution:
When a manual booking is made on an FGU claim it is included for adjustment distribution on a subsequent FGU Advisory. An eMessage can make either a 'FGU' booking or a 'Manual' booking.
If an eMessage booking is made that does not Affect FGU then in a subsequent FGU distribution it should be considered and included as would a similar manual booking. The affects FGU flag must be considered for an eMessage worksheet as the flag may be on or off.

Workaround:
Change the adjustment booking to consider the Previous (eMessage) booking that is not considered in the distribution / book the New Amount rather than the incorrect Distribution Adjustment.

Root Cause:
eMessage origin worksheet with flag Affects FGU off is not considered for subsequent FGU distribution

Extent of Impact:
eMessage origin booking not via FGU where subsequent FGU bookings are made

Problem:
User can create claim using Copy Selected Claim option despite having read rights only

Solution:
The system should prevent user from creating claim also when using copy selected claim option

Problem:
Find Headline abends when using access code segregation. 

Solution:
When access code segregation is in use, and logged in user has access to view global data - they should be able to open and view any Headline regardless of access code relation.

Problem:
System fails to distribute FGU correctly

Solution:
Roll back and re do correction SE-30269 (incorrect distribution when negative figures) 

Root cause

SE-30269

Problem:
Abend when creating new Claim program and remove the selected business and adding another.

Solution:

The system should not abend, but should also not allow the removal of the source business. The Claim Program's features are dependent on the source business. A business can only be removed if there are more than a single business included.

Workaround:
Create the Claim Program from the requested business

Problem:
We have reported case where LIRMA emessages is marked as Examined and it is Excluded from the Scheduler but it is Reprocessed by it. 

Solution:
When Reprocessing related messages from an original message being either Validated or Processed then related messages that are in Examined status should be excluded from this..

Related messages that have Excluded from Scheduler will still be reprocessed as a related message via the Scheduler (applicable parameters set) but not as an original message. If they should not be reprocessed as related via Scheduler then they should be set to Examined.

An Examined message may still be forced to Processed upon for example worksheet closure.

Workaround:
Root Cause:
Reprocessing (Validate or Process) Related messages.

Extent of Impact:
Messages with Examined status are Validated / Processed as part of reprocessing related messagfes.

Impact on Existing Data

Recovery Method for Existing Data Affected

Problem:
When calculating reinstatementon a business with unlimited reinstatements but a definite cover amount, the system abends.

When reinstatement cannot be calculated for one reason or another, the system raises information messages/warnings. The warnings raised varies depending on whether reinstatement is calculated from claim/business, or through order.

Through order the only warnings raised are AC0175 and AC0260.

AC0175 - missing reinstatement condition

AC0260 - missing claim condition

Solution:
When reinstatement cannot be calculated but is included in order, do not raise information messages/warnings - just skip the calculation for that business/insured period.

Messages should still be raised when calculating for single business (not order/scheduler)

AC0881 should be modified - only validate whether cover amount has been defined and is not unlimited. Aggregate limit may be unlimited. The system should not abend. This warning should not be raised in order/scheduler. If hitting this, the business should be skipped.

Problem:
“SYN0002 - The Accounting Classification field is required but has not been specified” is raised despite a single accounting classification with the respective Risk Code exist on the referenced business. eMessaging is also creating the claim as expected fully automatically.

Solution:
For a New Claim message that is referenced to a Section but has not yet created a Claim then that referenced Section should be used to determine if a single applicable Accounting Classification can be located an referenced.

Workaround:
As the problem is due to no Claim being created yet (by a New Claim message) then given the message has been Processed once to create a Claim then a subsequent Process would link an AC and create the worksheet).

Root Cause:
The recently added ability for a message booking a Claim Worksheet to locate and reference a Single applicable Accounting Classification did not consider that a New Claim message will not have yet created a Claim (missing check on Referenced Section that would be used to create Claim on).

Extent of Impact:
New Claim messages being processed for the first time that have a single applicable Accounting Classification that can be identified and referenced.

Problem:
While creating outgoing Remittances, SICS correctly following the logic 'Value/Due date=T+ Number of days' as per the parameter set-up. However, when the RW saved and reopened in a later date, again system applies the same logic to recalculate. This happens only when the RW created through emessage.

Solution:
When outgoing remittances are created (via BPL or emessage) with the system parameter 'populate due date/value date for remittance creation' & with the value as 'Value/Due date=T+ Number of days' and saved, the RW should be loaded with the previously saved due date/value date when it is reopened at a later date. (SICS should not recalculate these dates based on the reopening date).

Problem:
The containers are not expandable on Headline loss split tab on emessage

Solution:
The containers should be expandable on Headline loss split tab on emessage.

Problem:
My SQL was not completely removed from installation documentation.

Answer:
References to MySQL was present in the SICS documentation, specifically in the sections related to the DXC SICS API Server, DXC SICS Batch Server, and the DXC SICS Installation Guide is removed now. No more traces of MySQL are present now.

Problem:
Data is not inserting properly with BOAC004 procedure with method B.

Solution:
Tables BOAC_BOOK_PERIODS and BOAC_ACCT_PERIODS needs to be truncated  before loading the data  in BOAC004 procedure.

Problem:

• Created Report for Booking Period Start Date and Booking Period End Date using PC main Universe UDT and IDT for oracle db 
• Getting error in report which is mentioned in below screenshot

Solution: 

Alter the view script for V_AC_DETAIL_LIGHT , V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE , V_BOAC_PC_FACT. only for oracle db.
using the script which is mentioned in the below document
CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW V_AC_DETAIL_LIGHT - V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE - V_BOAC_PC_FACT.sql

After that remove the Object format from Booking Period End Date from PC Main Universe to get the default/correct format at report end.

Problem:
When manually searching for some worksheets where are some settled/unsettled issues still exists I found just a few worksheets (like TWS410540) where just some object is showing wrong amount.

Solution:
Need to change queries for Objects Detail Amount Settled (Func) and Detail Revaluation Amount Settled (Func).

Problem:
Deposits with Flat Premium is not appeared in BO report.

Overall Premium objects are giving wrong data in reporting.

Solution:
Need to do universe structure changes for Deposit Premium Condition class and Overall premium class by creating or adjusting  aliases  and  joins.

Also need to adjust object queries under Deposit Premium Condition class and Overall premium class wherever its required.

SICSR-32733.docx

Overall Premium - SICSR-32733.docx

Problem:
Main Class of Business (Code) and Class of Business (Code) objects are missing in PC Main Universe.

Solution:
Add the objects 'Main Class of Business (Code)' and 'Class of Business (Code)' to the PC Main Universe.

Problem:
Join condition is not defined correctly for the table  CNU_CLMRESPHDL.

Solution:
Need to adjust the join condition of the table  CNU_CLMRESPHDL and also, need to place the object claim manager in correct place under headline loss folder.

Problem:
Performance issues observed in the List of Values prompt for 'Booking Period As At Date in PC Main Universe.

Solution:
Need to update the LOV SQL for the below-mentioned objects.
1. Pairing BYRP
2. Pairing BYRP TO
3. Pairing BYRP Date
4. Pairing BYRP Date TO
5. REVAL BAL BYRP
6. REVAL BAL BYRP TO
7. REVAL BAL BYRP Date
8. REVAL BAL BYRP Date TO
9. REVAL DTL BYRP
10. REVAL DTL BYRP TO
11. REVAL DTL BYRP Date
12. REVAL DTL BYRP Date TO

Problem:
The object 'Annulled by' is missing from PC Main universe.

Solution:
Need to create a new object with name 'Annulled by' in PC Main universe.

Problem:
Premiums objects from EPI, Net EPI, SUPI and etc. are getting multiplied data in reporting due to universe Error

Deposit Premiums objects like Deposit (Original), Deposit OS (Original) and etc. are getting multiplied data in reporting due to universe Error

Solution:
Need to modify Objects queries which under below classes and need to do its respective universe structures changes,

Premium Information:

EPI
Net EPI
SUPI
Optional Premiums A
Optional Premiums B
Optional Premiums C
Optional Premiums D

also 

Instalments:

Deposit Premium Condition

SICSR-32955.docxSICSR-32955-1.docxSICSR-32955-2.docx

^{and also include below changes}

Problem:
When reporting on Limit Currency only Main currency was appearing, if treaty has multiple currencies.

Limit/Premium Currency (Code) object definition is wrong

Solution:
Need to create objects separately for Limit Currency and Premium Currency with correct object definitions.

Problem:
The Limits objects  like Per Event Cover Limit (Original), Aggregate Limit (Original), Liability Limit (Original), etc. are giving wrong data in reporting due to universe Error

Solution:
Alter views V_BOAC_PREM, V_BOAC_PREM_CURR, V_BOAC_PREM_CURR_MAIN (

V_BOAC_PREM_CURR_MAIN and V_BOAC_PREM_CURR and V_BOAC_PREM.sql)

Need to modify Objects queries for the Limit objects which are under below classes,

Limit Information:

Gross Main Limit
Gross Annual Aggregated Limit
All Limits (Detail)
Annual Aggregate Deductibles
Aggregate Limit
Cession Limit
Cover
Event Limit
Limit per Occurrence
Liabilty
Liabilty 1 Line
1 Unit
Per Event Cover
Optional Limits A
Optional Limits B
Optional Limits C
Optional Limits D
Optional Limits E

Problem:
View V_AMENDMENT_SHARE is missing a distinct , Meaning it is bringing back multiple rows which in turn are causing aggregation of data.

Solution:
Need to adjust the view script V_AMENDMENT_SHARE by adding GROUP BY to get the correct data.

Problem:
V_AMENDMENT_SHARE view and object signed share Registered date object needs to be adjusted.

Solution:
A minor update was made to the view V_AMENDMENT_SHARE by including BC_SHARE. SIGNED_SHARE_REG AS SIGNED_SHARE_REG in both the SELECT and GROUP BY clauses. Consequently, a corresponding adjustment is required in the universe.

Object Definition:

 @Aggregate_Aware(BC_SHARE0.SIGNED_SHARE_REG,V_AMENDMENT_SHARE.SIGNED_SHARE_REG)

Problem:
Cannot amend the 4 pairing tables in 25.2 unx IDT.

Solution:
1. Create a LOV with the SQL mentioned below in the data foundation layer and then save it.
SELECT DISTINCT
AC_STL_PAIRING.PAIRING_TIMESTAMP
FROM 
AC_STL_PAIRING
ORDER BY
1 DESC
2. Modify the pairing text box like this:

possible customization:

WHERE

STL.PAIRING_TIMESTAMP <= @Prompt('Enter Pairing Timestamp:','D','pairimpr2',mono,free)

3. After all these modifications, we can modify the SQL of the 4 derived tables with the possible customization:
For eg, for V_BOAC_STL_PAIR_FOLLOWER:

SELECT
 * 
FROM (
      SELECT
        ROW_NUMBER() 
                 OVER (
                       
                       PARTITION BY STL.FK_BALANCE1, STL.FK_BALANCE2,  STL.BAL1_FK_CURR , STL.BAL2_FK_CURR
                       ORDER BY STL.pairing_no DESC, STL.pairing_timestamp DESC, STL.NEXT_PAIRING_TS1 DESC, STL.ts_and_object_id
                      ) AS BP_RANK_SEQ,
        SUM(ORIG_SETTLED_AMT1) 
                 OVER (
                        PARTITION BY STL.FK_BALANCE1, STL.FK_BALANCE2,  STL.BAL1_FK_CURR , STL.BAL2_FK_CURR
                      ) AS SETTLED_AMT1,
        SUM(ORIG_SETTLED_AMT2) 
                 OVER (
                       
                       PARTITION BY STL.FK_BALANCE1, STL.FK_BALANCE2,  STL.BAL1_FK_CURR , STL.BAL2_FK_CURR
                      ) AS SETTLED_AMT2,
        STL.*
      FROM
        V_BOAC_STL_PAIRING_BAL2 STL
WHERE

STL.PAIRING_TIMESTAMP <= @Prompt('Enter Pairing Timestamp:','D','pairimp2',mono,free) 
     ) RESULT
WHERE 
  RESULT.BP_RANK_SEQ = 1

Problem:
In report level we receive wrong numbers when used Liability Limit aggregated objects.

Solution:
In limit folder where ever we are using PREMIUM_CURR_ORIG.EXCH_RATE_LIMIT this table change it to like this  *@Select(General Limit Information \ Exchange Rate Limit. 

Problem:
Performance issues with Booking Year Period—local object that for LOVs in prompt.

Solution:
Object: Booking Year Period—Local.

LOV SQL:

SELECT DISTINCT
 BOAC_DIM_TIME.BOOKING_YEAR_P
FROM
BOAC_DIM_TIME
ORDER BY
  1   DESC

Problem:
Few custom objects are still missing in the default universe.

Solution: 

Need to create Missing objects in PC Main Universe.
1. Need to create few alias tables called BOAC_PP_TYPE_NAME, ACLB_PP_TYPE, LEVEL_OF_BUS_TRIG & BALANCE_CLASSIFICATIONS.
2. Need to create joins for all the created alias tables.
3. Need to create all the missing objects.

Problem:
Join Issues for Responsible and Payment Partner Reason for Alert in PC Main Universe.

Solution:{}

Need to adjust the joins and object definition.

The correct join expressions are mentioned below.

ACLB_PP_Alert_Reason.CODE=PTY_PaymentPartner.FRK_RSN_FOR_ALERT AND ACLB_PP_Alert_Reason.SUBCLASS=PTY_PaymentPartner.FSK_RSN_FOR_ALERT

ACLB_RP_Alert_Reason.CODE=PTY_SecPayPartner.FRK_RSN_FOR_ALERT AND ACLB_RP_Alert_Reason.SUBCLASS=PTY_SecPayPartner.FSK_RSN_FOR_ALERT

Object definition:

@Aggregate_Aware(PTY_SecPayPartner.FRK_RSN_FOR_ALERT,PTY_PaymentPartner.FRK_RSN_FOR_ALERT)

Problem:
In the Paired Balance Revaluation, some objects are missing and should be added to the universe.

Solution:
Add Missing Objects:
The below highlighted objects under Paired Balance Revaluation must be added:

Create Alias Tables:

To support these objects, the following alias tables need to be created:

• PAIR_CNU_CURR_RevalBal

• PAIR_CNU_CURR_RevalBalFC2

• PAIR_REF_RevalBal

Define Joins:

Appropriate joins should be defined between the new alias tables and the relevant fact tables to ensure correct mapping and data integrity.

These changes are required to complete the implementation of the Paired Balance Revaluation section in the universe.

Problem:
IFRS17 SU report performance issue - System Dates.

Solution:
Under the folder System Information> System dates, modify the SQL definitions of the 5 system date objects as per the attachment below.

SICSR-33090_SQL_DEFS.txt

Problem:
V_PDM_ENTRY_CODE_GROUP view not available.

Solution:
Add the V_PDM_ENTRY_CODE_GROUP view to the NAC_PDM_F and ECHORE0425 databases 

Problem:
Issue in Report as column names is in lowercase.

Solution:
All columns in Table T_PDM_BUS_CANC_COND should have names(header) in UPPERCASE only.

Problem:
TAX_PERCENT field is showing null values and definition of that object is not coming from proper table.

Solution:
Need to change the definition of object from AC_LEDGER_DETAIL to BP_DETAIL table in V_PDM_TAX.

Problem:
Performance issue for the Accounting Year and Quarter object.

Solution:
Need to modify the Lov SQL and object definitions of the object.

 
object definition:

@Aggregate_Aware(concat(concat(V_BOAC_PC_FACT.AC_YEAR,' '),CASE WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.ACCOUNTING_QUARTER IN ('1') THEN 'Q1'
  WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.ACCOUNTING_QUARTER IN ('2') THEN 'Q2' 
  WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.ACCOUNTING_QUARTER IN ('3') THEN 'Q3' WHEN V_BOAC_PC_FACT.ACCOUNTING_QUARTER IN ('4') THEN 'Q4' END),
  concat(concat(V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.AC_YEAR,' '),CASE WHEN V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_AC_REF_PERIOD IN ('AM01','AM02','AM03','AQ1','AYR','NONE','INI') 
  THEN 'Q1' WHEN V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_AC_REF_PERIOD IN ('AHY1','AM04','AM05','AM06','AQ2','ATRI1')
  THEN 'Q2' WHEN V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_AC_REF_PERIOD IN ('AM07','AM08','AM09','AQ3','ATRI2') THEN 'Q3' 
  WHEN V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_AC_REF_PERIOD IN ('AHY2','AM10','AM11','AM12','AQ4','ATRI3') THEN 'Q4' END))

LOV SQL:

SELECT DISTINCT
  concat(concat(AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.AC_YEAR,' '),
CASE WHEN AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_BOOKING_PERIOD IN ('M01','M02','M03','Q1') THEN 'Q1' WHEN AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_BOOKING_PERIOD IN ('M04','M05','M06','Q2') THEN 'Q2' WHEN AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_BOOKING_PERIOD IN ('M07','M08','M09','Q3') THEN 'Q3' WHEN AC_LEDGER_BALANCE.FRK_BOOKING_PERIOD IN ('M10','M11','M12','Q4') THEN 'Q4' END) 
FROM
AC_LEDGER_BALANCE
ORDER BY
  1   DESC

Problem:
The views V_UDD_BUSINESS_L1 to V_UDD_BUSINESS_L10 have unwanted stuff which causes performance issue.

Solution:
In The views V_UDD_BUSINESS_L1 to V_UDD_BUSINESS_L10 contains RTRIM() and TO_CHAR which needs to be removed.

Problem:
Booking Period-Local(code) object is taking time to get the List of values at prompt level.

Solution:
Need to adjust the LOV SQL of the object Booking Period-Local(code) to get the values from table BOAC_DIM_TIME instead of view V_BOAC_PC_FACT.

Problem:
We have noticed that when there is a contract with multiple brokers then Business Objects, v 25.2 is not returning all the entries as it has before (e.g. in 23.2).

See jira SICSR-29995 for reference.

Previously (23.2) it was possible to see multiple brokers on a contract, if objects from only the business information class were included. Once Accounting information objects were added, that changed.

Currently it seems that the sorting is applied, but we do not see all the results regardless if there are accounting objects in the query or not.

See an example outcome from TEST (23.2) next to 25.2

Solution:
We need to set aggregate navigation to the following tables in the PC Main universe.:

Broker_EMPLOY2,                                                                                                                                        BRK_ADM_TSK3,                                                                                                                                          BROKER_CONTACT2,                                                                                                                                   PARTY_REL10_1,                                                                                                                                        REF_BrokerTask2,                                                                                                                                 REF_BrokAdminTask3                                                                                                                             REF_BCreditTerms2

Problem:
we noticed that when there are two Detail Amount Base (and Base 2) objects in a BO report in version 25.2, then there is only one prompt for 'Base exchange rate type'. Previously it was possible to select 2 different FX types for each Base Amount object, e.g. PER and PERP, but now only one option is available.

Solution:
In order to get back the prompts for Exchange rate type Base 2 & Base 3, kindly follow this step under the folder Support>Exchange Rates>Entry Codes. modify the SQL definition of Base 2 and Base 3 objects as shown in the screenshot below:

Problem:
Wrong object definition for the object 'Accounting Year and Quarter' in PC Main Universe.

Solution:
Need to adjust the view V_AC_LEDGER_BALANCE to add new column 'ACCOUNTING_YEAR_AND_QUARTER' and adjust the SELECT SQL for the object 'Accounting Year and Quarter' in PC Main Universe.

Problem:
Arithmetic overflow error while inserting into BO_PREM_CURR.

Solution:
Need to change all amount columns in BO_PREM_CURR from NUMERIC(23,9) to NUMERIC(22,2) to match LPC_PREMIUM.

Problem:
The 'Period Estimates Booking Year Period' object contains an extra space in the result.

Solution:
Need to modify the Oracle view V_EARNING_BYRP.

Instead of TO_CHAR(..., '00'), use LPAD(..., 2, '0').

LPAD explicitly converts the value to a string of fixed length 2.

It pads with zeros ('0') on the left.

Problem:
We noticed that a query generated in 25.2 BO universe returns less rows compared to 23.2  We compare results from 2 databases that have nearly identical data: 'PolishRe_Test' (23.2 ) and 'PolishRe_Upgrade' (25.2). When 23.2 query is run on the database on both, they return very similar results But once the report was upgraded to 25.1 and then 25.2, and the associated SQL query is run in Upgrade environment, then it returns less rows

Solution:

We need to change the below mentioned inner joins to left outer as mentioned in below images.

Problem:
Few Objects under Pairing History Objects folder are defined as dimensions instead of measures.

Solution:
Need to adjust the objects related to Unsettl Amts & Movement Between Start & End under Pairing History Objects–>Pairing–>Accounting Information in PC Main Universe to be measures instead of Dimensions.

Problem:
When running the soap file 'retrieveBookingsForABusiness', Cannot retrieve bookings with insured periods, but getting abend under response.

Solution:
When running the soap file 'retrieveBookingsForABusiness', the system should not abend, instead the relevant bookings to be retrieved in the Response. The criteria element UW year From and To should be included, to enable retrieval of bookings matching this criteria as same as online functionality.

Problem:
Incoming RM not created after Sics 25.1 migration due to direction of business for account group

Solution:
When system parameter 'Indicator for Level of Business on Remittance Worksheet Required' is ON and a SOAP request sent for Creating RW worksheet with valid inputs for <direction> with elements <externalCode> and <subclassNumber>, then the system should not trigger the validation error, instead it should create RW and provide successful response as it is currently working online.

Problem:
Booking Terms Maintenance Performance slow if user is linked to a Base Company

Solution:
'SicsSystemParameterAccountingBookingTermSelectionFunctinBP.allowedBookingTerms' needs to be optimized on looping to improve the performance.

Problem:
API Call creating a GL Transfer batch job is failing with error code GLT002 even though 'Transfer Type' provided in the request.

Solution:
When a request for SicsWsBatchProcessEntryPoint & Operation received to Create job with 'Transfer Type', then system should not stop it with validation GLT002, instead it should create the job according to the request.

Problem:
Multi Accounting Order doesn't consider the MCOB selection and booked the worksheet for all MCOB. 

Solution:
In the SICSR-29976 issue, we resolved the multi-section issue, and the MG Accounting Order now appropriately books the worksheet for the appropriate section in accordance with the MCOB selected on the order.

We have now discovered that when a business has many accounting classifications based on the MCOB and we choose one of them on the MG accounting order, the order does not take this into consideration and books the worksheet for all.

We will ensure that the Multi GAAP Accounting Order takes the MCOB into consideration, even if the specified business has numerous accounting classifications, and will book the worksheet only for the selected one and not the others.

Existing functionality will stay unchanged. For example, if we have two accounting classifications without a split ratio on the Business Main Section and run the order with any MCOB selected, the order will generate the worksheet for the random one OR the first one AC.

Problem:
How can we see log view for Period Estimates of underwriter's estimates?

Solution:
Logs should be updated and shown for Multi GAAP (Period Estimates) and Underwriters Estimates (Pricing and Adjusted Estimate), exactly as they are for other conditions.

Problem:
Multi GAAP Recalculation Order Missing Validation Error.

Solution:
Muti GAAP Orders should populate the Validation error message when the listed business does not meet the extraction criteria of the order. All MGAAP Orders should give the validation message, i.e. AC0072 Validation Error.- 'The selected business did not match the order criteria'

Problem:
The Import Function works fine with accurate numbers in the imported excel file, but there is no Validation error warning when we have inaccurate values in the projection year and date format. There is only one validation error message for the incorrect insured period.

If we enter an incorrect value in an excel file and try to import it, the system does not return a validation error message and instead returns a successful message, which is incorrect.
Observation, even if we successfully sent a message with the wrong value. SICS does not import the data.

Solution:
We now have an import template available for 'UW Estimates Supporting Figures Import' under Periodic function and certain changes are required to have more specific about the date format, we will make sure that Date format must be written in the excel file note section of 'Insured Period' i.e., YYYY-MM-DD.

We will also ensure that the Import function provides a successful message only when the date is correct, which states it matches the specified business data. Currently, it returns a successful message even if the 'Currency' column contains a different currency defined in the excel file; however, it should return an error message if it does not match the Business currency. It should be addressed for both P&C and Life.

In the Life section, we have an additional column in the template called 'Projection Year', and the Import function is presently not returning any validation error messages when it differs from the business-defined Projection year; we will ensure that validation is raised for this column as well.

Problem:
fastCreateWorksheet API not linking Assumed Business.

When the worksheet on OCC or ORP is created through the SOAP file - fastCreateTechnicalWorksheet, the 'source business' field is empty.

Solution:
When worksheets on OCC or ORP are created through the webservice 'fastCreateTechnicalWorksheet', the link to the relevant IAB should be established and the 'source business' field should bear the IAB, as it is correctly working when whorksheets are created/closed through 'createWorksheet' and 'closeWorksheet' webservices.

Problem:
When there are more than 700 tasks associated with a user, the generated SQL to fetch the task comments has too many parameters for SQL Server.

Solution:
Revise the query method to be more efficient.

Workaround:
Copy some of the rows to an temp table until a fix can be provided.

Problem:
Functional Currency not calculated with Fast APIs (fastCreateTechnicalWorksheet)

Solution:
When worksheet is created through fastCreateTechnicalWorksheet, the FC currency and amount should be shown correctly as it works for createWorksheet and closeWorksheet webservices.

Problem:
FRK_CATEGORY is missing from T_PDM_PARTNER_TO_BUSINESS and FRK_OFFICE_TYPE from the ADDRESS table.

Solution:
Add Missing Columns:

Add the column FRK_CATEGORY to the T_PDM_PARTNER_TO_BUSINESS table.
Add the column FRK_OFFICE_TYPE to the ADDRESS table

Problem:
Missing  views and tables Combined_Query_view_KK and Combined_Query_view_KK2.

Solution:
Need to add Add Combined_Query_view_KK and Combined_Query_view_KK2 to the NAC_PDM_F and Echore0425 databases. Rename the views and tables with clear, descriptive names for easier identification.

Aim of function:
When create the Retrocession Calculation order, according to the system parameter setting, system setting default values for Booking Year Period and Order status on the Retrocession Calculation order.

Business value for customers:
Create the Retrocession Calculation order from the Administration condition of the OCC, according to the system parameter setting, system setting default values for Booking Year Period and Order status in Retrocession Calculation order. This will help the users to avoid manually entering the Booking year period and Order status on the order. 

System Parameters Affected:
Add the system parameter 'Default Booking Year Period for Retrocession Calculation Order' on the Accounting>>Retrocession>>General    

Add new system parameter is named as 'Set default Order Status of Retrocession Calculation Order' on the Accounting>>Retrocession>>General. 

Existing functionality affected:
Retrocession Calculation Order

Aim of function:
When create the Retrocession Account order, according to the system parameter setting, system setting default values for Order status on the Retrocession Account order.

Business value for customers:
Create the Retrocession Account order from the Administration condition of the OCC, according to the system parameter setting, system setting default values for Order status in Retrocession Account order. This will help the users to avoid manually select the Order status on the order.

System Parameters Affected:
Accounting>>Retrocession>>General >> Default Order status for Retrocession Account Order

Existing functionality affected:
Retrocession Account Order/Order Status

Aim of function:
When create the Retrocession Estimation Calculation order, according to the system parameter setting, system setting default values for Booking Year Period on the Retrocession Estimation Calculation order.

Business value for customers:
Create the Retrocession Estimation Calculation order from the Administration condition of the OCC, according to the system parameter setting, system setting default values for Booking Year Period in Retrocession Estimation Calculation order. This will help the users to avoid manually entering the Booking year period on the order.

System Parameters Affected:
Add the system parameter 'Default Booking Year Period for Retrocession Estimation Calculation Order' on the Accounting>>Retrocession>>General    

Existing functionality affected:
Retrocession Estimation Calculation Order

Aim of function:
According to the System Parameter settings, when we have the new parameter 'Auto-populate the Details on Reserve Condition' under Business, Conditions, Miscellaneous is SELECTED, then on the reserve condition system should Auto-populate the 'Reserve' menu.

Business value for customers:
Auto-populating the details will help the users to avoid manually entering the same information on the reserve condition for the all the agreements.

System Parameters Affected:
N/A

Existing functionality affected:
Reserve Condition

Aim of function:
To display a Question message - 'The sum of the included balances exceeds the Unsettled Amount of the Driving Balance. If you continue the pairing, the Driving Balance will be Partially Settled” with an option to answer Yes or No' - whenever the balances (driving remittance balances is lesser than the included technical /claim balance) involved in the balance pairing process have an unsettled balance with a sign opposite to its original balance. This is to ensure that when the driving balance is 'over-settled,' the remittance is always partially settled during pairing.

Business value for customers:
When the bill amount exceeds the remittance and is set as partially settled, it can complicate financial accounting, disrupt business operations, and create additional work. As a result, some clients are reluctant to adopt this approach and prefer to always set the driving balance as partially settled in such cases. 

This enhancement will meet their requirements and make partial pairing more flexible. 

This will reduce the time and effort spent on troubleshooting validation errors and improve the overall accuracy of Balance paring.  

System Parameters Affected:
A new System Parameter 'Partially settle the over-settled Remittance' under Accounting> Balance Pairing

Existing functionality affected:
Manual Balance Pairing

Aim of function:
To enable the system to consider the ‘Provisional Commission’ while using ‘Automatic Gross-up of Premium and Booking of Deductions’ function, in case of deduction method ‘Sliding Scale Commission’ or ‘Stepped Sliding Scale Commission’

Business value for customers:
This will enable the users to calculate deduction from net premiums and to gross-up through the ‘Automatic Gross-up of Premium and Booking of Deductions’ function even for ‘Sliding Scale Commission’ or ‘Stepped Sliding Scale Commission’ using the provisional commission percentage as defined.

System Parameters Affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
Calculation of Deduction condition, type as Commission

Aim of Function:
Enhance 'Reserve and Deposit Details Mass Update' for Retrocessionaire Participation always create 'AsBooking' figures.

Business value for customers:
Many clients use worksheets in Booking Currency as the basis of General Ledger Transfer (GLT). Therefore, it is also very important to generate ‘As Booking’ figures when transfer open historical reserves and deposits details from the old Business Partner to the new Business Partner after a company merger for Level of Businesses Retrocessionaire Participation.

System Parameters Affected:
New system parameter: Accounting/Retrocession/General/Create figures in Booking Currency when executing Reserve and Deposit Detail Mass Update.

Existing functionality affected:
Reserve and Deposit Details Mass Update

Aim of function:
It is important to make sure that an agreement has sufficient information before it is accepted by all parties. To ensure this, SICS offers check items in the Compliance Check List. Earlier, the user had to set each item in the Compliance Check List to ‘Yes’ or ’No’ individually. To ease the completion of the Compliance Check List, the system now has an option to set to all items in the list to ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ in one go.  

Business value for customers:
Easier completion of the Compliance Check List
Saves time

System Parameters affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
Maintain Compliance Check List
Renew Business
Manage Security

Aim of function:
In some cases, you may want to use an already recorded business as a template for creating a new. When copying a business, earlier, the system also copied the shares. As shares vary from one contract to another, it is now possible to copy a business without copying the shares. This is customizable so that, if set up to not copy, the new business will get no shares. If the new business however is definite, the system adds a page to the copy function where the user can enter the new share.

Business value for customers:
Ensures accuracy
Improves usability

System Parameters Affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
Copy Business
Maintain Share Conditions
Maintain Limit and Premium Conditions
Manage Agreement Life Cycle Status
Maintain System Parameters
Copy Business by Web Service

Aim of function:
An outward cedent’s contract may have shares relating to the entire contract. These can, for facultative business, be expressed of the same share as the covered policy. The system also shows these shares on each participant. The contract may further express the share of the participants from these contract shares. If the user changes the shares of an outward cedent's contract, the system now also updates the equivalent shares on the participants and does the necessary recalculations.

Business value for customers:
Increases information accuracy.
Improves clarity.

System Parameters affected:
N/A

Existing functionality affected:
Maintain Share Conditions
Maintain Limit and Premium Conditions
Update Business
Create Share Conditions by Web Service
Update Share Conditions by Web Service

Aim of function:
The Insured Period Title and Base Company Name should be displayed in Claim Section List chooser and also in the FGU Distribution.

Business value for customers:
It will be easier to identify the correct section of a claim if Base Company and Insured Period Title are displayed.

System Parameters Affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
View Claims
Find Claims

Aim of function:
The CVE Security Report section of SICS Docs now shows both Exposed and Fixed CVEs for the current and the last 8 prior releases.
This now makes it crystal clear what CVEs have been fixed in each release as well as what CVEs the software is still exposed to.

Business value for customers:
Clear documentation of both fixed and exposed CVEs. Customers can now search for a CVE in SICS Docs to find out which release it was fixed and which versions are exposed to a particular vulnerability.
This is a valuable insight for upgrade planning.

System Parameters Affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
None

Aim of function:

• Enable automatic, incremental data updates to PDM tables by consuming change events from Kafka topics. The solution detects and applies only the changed data (based on views) using efficient batched MERGE operations, reducing full refresh overhead and improving processing time

Business value for customers

• Improved Performance: Eliminates the need for full table refreshes by applying only incremental changes.
• Real-time Synchronization: Ensures that PDM tables stay in sync with source systems as soon as view-level data changes are detected.
• Scalability: Handles large volumes of data efficiently with batch processing and minimizes impact on system resources.
• Maintainability: Reduces manual intervention through automated change detection and processing, improving operational efficiency.

System Parameters Affected
N/A

Existing functionality affected
N/A

Aim of function:
The following user experience improvements:

• Continued icon improvement
• Drag and Drop support for file selection
• Investigation of Dark Mode support

Business value for customers:
Improved cosmetic and functional improvements.

System Parameters Affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
N/A

Aim of function:
To Introduce a new variable 'Total Amount Booked” in the Multi GAAP and Underwriter estimates calculation editor.

Business value for customers: 

To retrieve the figures from “Total Amount Booked” field in P/L condition

System Parameters Affected:
Added new calculation variable i.e. 'Total Amount Booked' with Two sub variable 'Gross' & 'Net'.

Existing functionality affected

Multi GAAP and Underwriter Estimates Calculation Editor. 

Aim of function:
Upgrade the delivered JRE to Amazon Corretto Java 21 which is the latest Long Term Support version of Java.
https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/java-se-support-roadmap.html

Business value for customers:
Access to new functionality and the latest security patches.
Avoidance of future technical debt.

System Parameters Affected:
None

Existing functionality affected:
All, though it is mostly not visible to the end user.