schwabg
Tue Feb 08 19:11:03 CST 2005
Thank you for the information about Yodlee. I was a Fleet Bank customer and I
thought it was great when upgrading to Money 2005 because I was looking
forward to having my transactions downloaded directly as a Bank of
America-Formerly Fleet customer. Then I started to experience the duplicate
transactions and lag time on transactions. Is this something that you
anticipate Yodlee is working on?
Thanks,
Greg
"Art McClinton" wrote:
> As Dogflyer pointed out, BoA and several other banks that are undates
> within Money via the Auto update do not work very well. The problem is
> the third party software called Yodlee that goes to the screens of the
> account and retrieves data which it reformats into files for Money to
> read and sends them. I am not certain what issues you are having with
> BoA. The standard ones are: recent data not sent, data entered
> multiple times and check numbers not sent. The easiest solution is to
> revert to the manual download using OFX files per what you would have
> performed in earlier versions of Money. I do not know how long it will
> take Yodlee to fix their software. I have a test account that I monitor
> it with, but I do not have my production account using anything
> associated with a Yodlee download.
>
> Art McClinton
>
> ps - As Cal normally points out:
>
> A really neat way to find prior postings in this group is to use the
> Google Usenet Groups archive.
>
>
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search enter words that you
> think would be in relevant posts into the "all of the words" box.
> Enter microsoft.public.money into the newsgroup box. Consider
> selecting Sort By Date. Bank of America has shown up in the title or
> message of many threads.
>
> Dogflyer wrote:
> > I think it depends on how Bank of America works their updates. I bank
> > with Wells Fargo and the auto update does not work either. Instead, I
> > go to the Wells Fargo site and use their tool for downloading into
> > Money which works just fine. Maybe you need to do the same with B of
> > A. Or, I might be totally wrong!
> >
>
>