Now there is the possibility to also handle references on invoices that come via Peppol. If a rejection is required, it is done as a dispute. The function is offered by InExchange as an additional service.
– In combination with regular reference checking, no invoices will ever land in the business system with the wrong reference. With this solution, the customer has 100 percent reference control," emphasizes Christofer Wiechert, Pre-sale/Bid Manager at Inexchange.
It is not possible to apply the usual reference checking system to business documents received via Peppol. The OpenPeppol rules put a stop to it. According to these rules, you cannot reject Peppol invoices.
According to some reactions, this is actually perceived as a problem.
– We sometimes encounter a hesitation among companies to join the Peppol network precisely because the rules are designed this way. The value of knowing that the reference is correct is so strong. That's why you have reference checks. If you don't check the invoices that come via Peppol, the result is that you don't have full coverage," says Sofia Euström, Key Account Manager at Inexchange.
But now Inexchange has come up with an excellent solution.
With the Peppol dispute service as an add-on to regular reference checking, the customer's reference protection is complete. The customer can be absolutely sure that all invoices entering the ERP system have the correct reference. Even those distributed via the Peppol structure. If the reference is not correct, the invoice is handled by InExchange and the supplier is asked to correct the error.
In other words: the recipient is safe and secure. But a certain amount of curiosity is still justified. How is the Peppol verification actually constructed?
- It is an add-on service that acts as an extended part of the traditional reference check. The user experience is the same," says Christofer Wiechert, Presale/Bid Manager at Inexchange.
- We receive the invoice and validate it just like we do with the regular reference check. Then we match against the references that the customer has in their existing reference check.
But then, in the next step, the handling is different.
In Peppol there is a message format ("Invoice Response"). This feature means that in Peppol's infrastructure you can reply: "We dispute the invoice".
- This is what we use, Christofer clarifies.
But how the dispute is taken forward, and delivered, is different. If the issuer is set up with Invoice Response, no further processing is required. Then the dispute is submitted that way. However, if the issuer is not registered for the message format in Peppol, communication needs to take place in another way.
For the sake of clarity, it seems justified to describe the process that InExchange automatically performs on behalf of the customer:
- First of all, it is checked if the issuer of the invoice in question can receive a message response in Peppol. If the answer is yes, a message is sent that the invoice is disputed.
- If the described support is missing, it is checked whether there is an e-mail address for the issuer instead. If so, the rejection notice is sent as an e-mail.
- If no e-mail address is available either, the rejection notice is sent as a regular traditional letter.
– Of course, the customer is free to formulate the message themselves if they wish, Christofer points out.
According to Christofer Wiechert, this additional service plays an important role.
– If you have reference checking, you probably want to achieve its entire purpose, i.e. to avoid getting invoices with the wrong reference. If you choose in this situation not to add the Peppol dispute, you actually miss the goal. Then the whole need is not met. You only solve part of the problem," he says.
The proportion of invoices that go through Peppol is also something that will expand. Since several government agencies are pointing very clearly in the direction of Peppol, an increase will be inevitable.
– Absolutely. The number of pepper spray invoices will almost certainly increase. So what you risk facing is a growing concern. But above all, it will be problematic for the customer to have to deal with different infrastructures, Christofer notes and points out:
– The reason why the structures must be separated is that they require different management. Reference checking of invoices received via interconnection never needs to involve regular mail. However, this may be necessary if Peppol is involved. If it is not possible to notify in another way, the dispute must be sent out by post.
Inexchange charges a fee for the Peppol dispute, but Christofer Wiechert points out that it is wise to be equipped with a reference check that fully blocks the way for any reference errors. "The money it saves is guaranteed to be saved in administrative time on invoice processing," he says.