System and method of account reconciliation for electronic transactions

• US 20050027648A1
• Filed: 07/29/2003
• Published: 02/03/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 07/29/2003
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Mtrex Incorporated
• Original Assignee: Mtrex Incorporated
• Inventors: Matthews, David J., Knowles, W. Jeffrey, Day, Russell Hales
• Application Number:
  US10/629,784
• Publication Number:
  US 20050027648A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/38
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/04 Payment circuits
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/102 Bill distribution or payments
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/12 specially adapted for electronic shopping systems
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/24 Credit schemes, i.e. "pay after"
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/381 Currency conversion
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/03 Credit; Loans; Processing thereof
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/12 Accounting

Abstract

A transaction process system (10) provides for data transactions between parties. In a credit card transaction, the parties are the merchant (20), acquiring bank (24), card association (34), issuing bank (14), and cardholder (12). A transaction processing center (30) is positioned between the acquiring bank and the card association. The transaction processing center provides data processing channels for message-based processing (72) and filed-based processing (76). The file-based processing uses an incoming queue (80) and outgoing queue (84) to simplify the interface. The transaction processing center also provides for currency conversions and account reconciliation on a per transaction basis. The transaction processing center uses a scheduler (160) to efficiently manage the data processing resources and an account reconciliation processor (200) to identify discrepancies and initiate corrective action.

Claims

1. A method of reconciling financial transactions, comprising:

receiving a first statement of financial transactions generated according to a first set of rules;

providing a second statement using a second set of rules consistent with the first set of rules used to generate the first statement; and

comparing the second statement to the first statement to identify discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the step of comparing the second statement to the first statement includes comparing a first value from the first statement with a second value from the second statement to determine a difference between the first value and the second value.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein the step of comparing the second statement to the first statement further includes identifying causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

4. The method of claim 3 wherein the step of identifying causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement includes evaluating a list of possible errors.

5. The method of claim 1 further including instituting correction action upon identifying discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein the first statement is received from a credit card association.

7. The method of claim 1 wherein the second set of rules is compiled from the first set of rules such that the second statement simulates the first statement and generates similar results given similar data input.

8. The method of claim 7 wherein the second statement is generated by a third party service provider.

9. The method of claim 1 wherein the second statement is generated on a per transaction basis.

10. A method of performing account reconciliation of financial transactions, comprising:

receiving a first statement of financial transactions generated according to a first set of rules;

providing a second statement using a second set of rules;

comparing the second statement to the first statement to identify discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement; and

determining causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

11. The method of claim 10 wherein the step of comparing the second statement to the first statement includes comparing a first value from the first statement with a second value from the second statement to determine a difference between the first value and the second value.

12. The method of claim 10 wherein the step of determining causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement includes evaluating a list of possible errors.

13. The method of claim 10 further including instituting correction action upon identifying discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

14. The method of claim 10 wherein the second set of rules is consistent with and compiled from the first set of rules such that the second statement simulates the first statement and generates similar results given similar data input.

15. The method of claim 10 wherein the second statement is generated on a per transaction basis.

16. A credit card processing system, comprising a data processing center having a communication link to a credit card association to receive a first statement of credit card transactions generated using a first set of rules, wherein the data processing center generates a second statement using a second set of rules consistent with the first set of rules used to generate the first statement and compares the second statement to the first statement to identify discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

17. The credit card processing system of claim 16 wherein the data processing center identifies causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

18. The credit card processing system of claim 17 wherein the data processing center identifies the causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement by evaluating a list of possible errors.

19. The credit card processing system of claim 16 wherein the data processing center recommends correction action upon identifying discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

20. The credit card processing system of claim 16 wherein the second set of rules is compiled from the first set of rules such that the second statement simulates the first statement and generates similar results given similar data input.

21. A computer based system for reconciling financial transactions, comprising:

means for receiving a first statement of financial transactions generated according to a first set of rules;

means for providing a second statement using a second set of rules consistent with the first set of rules used to generate the first statement; and

means for comparing the second statement to the first statement to identify discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

22. The computer based system of claim 21 further including means for identifying causation of the discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

23. The computer based system of claim 21 further including means for instituting correction action upon identifying discrepancy between the first statement and the second statement.

24. The computer based system of claim 21 wherein the second set of rules is compiled from the first set of rules such that the second statement simulates the first statement and generates similar results given similar data input.