Payment Options

[DaveSMR]

It would be nice to have a checkbox similiar to the "Limit to Customer Accounts" against payment options that was "Limit to Retail Customers".

This would ensure that I didn't have to present my trade account customers with options to pay by PayPal or SagePay. This would help to stop trade customers paying with credit cards or other % transaction value charge methods. This obviously costs us money, either letting the transaction go or taking the time to refund it and ensuring an acceptable payment method is used.

I am aware of the fact that I could configure SagePay to limit the accepted cards but that in turn would restrict what I was accepting from Retail Customers and that would be undesirable.

If there is already a fix for this issue I would be grateful for direction on the matter. If not I feel it would be a nice addition to future versions.

[leehack]

Can't you change the thinking and setup your payment methods as normal for retail customers and define the payment method for account customers against their account?

[DaveSMR]

I have gone into "Customer Accounts", then edit (on my test account) and under the "Account tab" used the "Payment Method:" drop down to select "Invoice with order".

All this seems to have accomplished is that the logged in account now has another payment option tagged onto the bottom of the standard retail ones. The radio button is selected by default but nothing prevents them from running an order through using the other options. It would be nice if I could set just one option for this account and omit all others.

[leehack]

Gotcha, so when adding to the account a payment method all it does is select that as the default, the others still show and can be selected. If so, some clever use of the NOTINB2B tags would work to hide the unwanted options, a thread discussing this with Jont about manipulating the contents of the list for logged in customers definitely exists and it worked (i'm sure he confirmed).

I agree in principle though, you should be able to do this automatically and i'd also like to see a 'lock' button so that when you define a method against an account, that is the only option offered.

Make sure you check the KB just in case too, might just be something in there.

[DaveSMR]

Thanks for the tip the NOTINB2B will generate the desired effect with some clever placement.

Is there anyway to specify that content is visible to acct customers only, kind of the opposite of NOTINB2B?

[leehack]

Yes that gets even more confusing though because you use the same tags lol. Have a look at the KB article, it shows you how to hide and not hide content, i have to refer to each time myself as it blows my mind, you use the same tags, but i think you use them twice when hiding and once when showing, don't quote me on that, it is something weird like that though.

Reemember you will need uncompressed html selected too.

[Duncan Rounding]

Here's a summary:

<Actinic:NOTINB2B><!--</Actinic:NOTINB2B>
when logged in you will see this
<Actinic:NOTINB2B>--></Actinic:NOTINB2B>

<Actinic:NOTINB2B>
when not logged in you will see this
</Actinic:NOTINB2B>

Compact html must not be checked in Design | Design Options though

PS - I seem to remember there being an inverted tag to use though - it was mentioned not that long ago. I think it referred to an old post by Chris D.

[DaveSMR]

Just wanted to shed some further insight here that I have discovered in my trail and error approach.

Even with the
Compact html from Design | Design Options checked
the
<Actinic:NOTINB2B><!--</Actinic:NOTINB2B> <Actinic:NOTINB2B>--></Actinic:NOTINB2B>
method still works when putting this code into the payment options. I suspect this is because this reference is used directly by the script and thus manages to escape the compacting by actinic? but i can only speculate.

Thank you all for your help, sorry if this thread ended up being somewhat off topic.