ADM.4:4 - Solution
ADM.4:4.1 - Start from the receiving action
State what each relevant participant needs to decide or perform. A payer may need to establish whether an obligation is discharged; a recipient may need to allocate a receipt to an invoice. The administrative correspondence serves those actions.
Recover each source statement in its own terms. Ask what the participant means by “paid”: an instruction was issued, a transfer settled, or a particular obligation was discharged under an applicable rule. Retain the author, source, intended use and time when those facts affect interpretation. The exact authority of a source matters to the claim for which it is used.
Do not demand a universal vocabulary before an ordinary action can proceed. If a supplied statement is already clear and adequate, use it.
ADM.4:4.2 - Identify the subjects before comparing the claims
Determine whether the statements concern one subject, different subjects, or subjects whose identity remains unresolved. Use the information appropriate to the actual event or relation: participant identities, the relevant action, source reference and its issuer, amount and currency where applicable, effective time and supporting evidence.
A matching local identifier is evidence to interpret within its source scheme. It does not alone prove event identity. Repeated participants can also take part in another event. Use SIE.5 when the cross-source identity question cannot be resolved from adequate supplied facts; SIE.4 and SIE.6 supply the needed alignment and claim-composition methods for a substantive meaning problem.
For a relation history, use ADM.3 and the direct A.6.REL identity rule only as far as the receiving use needs. A different edition of a claim can still describe the same relation.
ADM.4:4.3 - Choose the correct comparison result
Distinguish three situations:
| Situation | Result and next move |
|---|---|
| Correct participant-relative accounts of one subject | Preserve each account’s meaning and state the correspondence needed for the participant actions. An outgoing payment and an incoming receipt can both describe the same transfer. |
| Different or related subjects | State the relation between them and use the appropriate facts for each question. A payment instruction, the resulting transfer and an obligation are different subjects; a label such as “payment” can refer to any of them. |
| Incompatible claims or an unresolved fact about the relevant subject | Preserve the exact claim and uncertainty. Obtain the evidence, qualified interpretation or authorized correction that can resolve it before relying on that disputed conclusion. |
These situations are distinguished by the case facts and meanings, not by a preference for agreement. Several can occur in one case: the parties can identify the same transfer and still disagree about the fee or its effect on an obligation.
ADM.4:4.4 - Retain only the correspondence needed for use
State the common subject and how each local account refers to it. Keep the local purpose, participant-relative meaning, effective time and authority or evidence qualification that changes the receiving action. A short joined explanation can be enough.
For the payer/recipient case, retain that A17 calls transfer T a disbursement by P and B82 calls T a receipt by Q. The shared event description can say that 300 moved from P to Q at the evidenced time. P and Q then apply their supplied conditions to their different administrative decisions.
Correct a source record only through the source’s appropriate authority and procedure. A useful cross-source explanation does not authorize overwriting a participant’s account or silently replacing its rule.
ADM.4:4.5 - Return the remaining question and stop
If the correspondence and supplied facts answer the receiving question, let the participant act under the applicable instruction. Record the useful correspondence where that action needs it.
If an amount, time or effect remains unknown, state the exact missing fact and request it from a source or checker able to establish it. If institutional applicability is disputed, return it to the competent decision maker. A technical retry is appropriate only after the state and applicable recovery rule are adequate; a missing settlement confirmation is not a reason to issue a potentially duplicate payment.
The reconciliation can finish with a correspondence plus one bounded unresolved claim. It need not make every source identical or settle questions outside the receiving use.
ADM.4:4.6 - What changes in practice
Participants can retain different correct descriptions and still coordinate. A handler can also distinguish a meaning problem from an unknown effect, a wrong identity or a rule question and request the right next result. Consistent wording becomes a means of understanding the event, rather than a substitute for establishing it.