[$250] [CVP] Subpar account validation flow in the bottom up flow when paying with a business bank account

[trjExpensify]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number:
Reproducible in staging?:
Reproducible in production?:
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @trjExpensify
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1725290110940169

Action Performed:

Prerequisite: The submitter and payer have a personal currency of USD, in order to see the option to Pay with Expensify

1. [Submitter] Submit a $50 expense to someone who doesn’t have an Expensify account
2. [Payer] Click the Pay button in the email received to sign-in unvalidated
3. [Payer] Click Pay with Expensify > Business Bank Account
4. [Payer] Click Connect with Plaid

Expected Result:

When the user lands on the Connect bank account page, it should look like this:

Note: To compare, simply create workspace > enable workflows > payments > connect bank account which shows the above screen to require validation.

Actual Result:

Connect options are not greyed out, user can continue and then hit a subpar auth error on step one of the VBBA setup flow:

Workaround:

Validate the account.

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

See above.

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021832008208936334242
• Upwork Job ID: 1832008208936334242
• Last Price Increase: 2024-09-06
• Automatic offers:
• CyberAndrii | Contributor | 103923785

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @johncschuster (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021832008208936334242

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @s77rt (External)

[trjExpensify]

CC: @NikkiWines @allroundexperts @dukenv0307 with experience on the validation prompt in the connect bank account flow.

[dukenv0307]

Let me check.

[CyberAndrii]

The SigninUserWithLink request sets user.validated to false. Later OpenApp overrides it to true.

The user.validated property is used to determine whether those buttons should be disabled

App/src/pages/ReimbursementAccount/BankAccountStep.tsx

Line 144 in 8b348c6

isDisabled={!!isPlaidDisabled || !user?.validated}

I think this is a BE issue with the OpenApp request.

---

On the other hand, there's the account.validated property that works similarly but doesn't have this bug. I'm confused what's the difference between them.

App/src/types/onyx/Account.ts

Lines 66 to 67 in 8b348c6

	/** Whether the account is validated */
	validated?: boolean;

Anyway, unless there's a way to point the email link to dev.new.expensify.com:8082, I don't think external contributors can fix this.

[s77rt]

@CyberAndrii Thanks for looking into this. From the Expected results:

Note: To compare, simply create workspace > enable workflows > payments > connect bank account which shows the above screen to require validation.

Did you get the restricted view or were you able to proceed normally?

[trjExpensify]

@CyberAndrii any movement on that Q from @s77rt? We're keen to get this one resolved ASAP. Thanks!

[CyberAndrii]

The button is not grayed out and I don't get the error. Are you sure opening the email link doesn't verify the account? It looks like it either does or BE is returning an incorrect value for user.validated as mentioned in my previous comment.

Screen.Recording.2024-09-11.at.13.41.06.mov

[trjExpensify]

@CyberAndrii interesting. Can you continue that flow to adding the account by clicking Continue > Choose "Wells Fargo" > U: user_good P: pass_good > follow the prompts to have the modal close and return to Expensify.

[CyberAndrii]

Yup, I see the error now. After re-logging into the account it disappeared and I can continue with the steps.

Screen.Recording.2024-09-11.at.15.05.55.mov

Do you know the difference between these two? Maybe we should use the other one here

App/src/types/onyx/Account.ts

Lines 74 to 75 in e9642dc

	/** Whether the account is validated */
	validated?: boolean;

App/src/types/onyx/User.ts

Lines 12 to 13 in e9642dc

	/** Is the user account validated? */
	validated: boolean;

[trjExpensify]

Yup, I see the error now.

Wahoo, I'm not crazy! 😉

Do you know the difference between these two? Maybe we should use the other one here

I don't I'm afraid. @mountiny might, but also @blazejkustra perhaps just following the blame on when these were touched last.

[trjExpensify]

Maybe we should use the other one here

Does that fix it when making the change from !user?.validated to !account?.validated in dev?

[trjExpensify]

Asked in Slack here: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1726058996374949

[blazejkustra]

I don't I'm afraid. @mountiny might, but also @blazejkustra perhaps just following the blame on when these were touched last.

Unfortunately I don't have much context, I created these types when migrating the codebase to TS 😢

[CyberAndrii]

Does that fix it when making the change from !user?.validated to !account?.validated in dev?

Yes it does

[s77rt]

I think the value in the account modal is the source of truth and we should remove user.validated from FE and BE.

🎀 👀 🎀 To check the BE and where it's sending user.validated and change it to account.validated (if necessary)

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @francoisl, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[s77rt]

The plan:

1. BE PR to send account.validated in any place that we are sending user.validated
2. FE PR to use account.validated
3. BE PR to remove and stop sending user.validated (Important: This has to be done after all clients got upgraded to the latest App version)

[s77rt]

@francoisl Please assign @CyberAndrii for the proposed solution

[francoisl]

For now let's do step 2 and use account.validated instead of user.validated in that flow, but I don't think we should completely remove user.validated from the backend - there are a few flows I need to double-check on first.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @CyberAndrii 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[CyberAndrii]

The PR was deployed to production on September 16 so this should be ready for payment

[johncschuster]

Payment Summary:

Contributor: @CyberAndrii paid $250 via Upwork - PAID 🎉
Contributor+: @s77rt due $250 via NewDot

Upwork job here!

@s77rt do we need a regression test step list here? If so, can you provide one?

[s77rt]

@johncschuster I'm not due payment here. The C+ was @ishpaul777 and he is paid already (#49215). I don't think this requires a regression test based on the fact that we had this similar test 1971031 and it's now deleted. This can be closed.

[johncschuster]

Ah, thank you for the correction, @s77rt! Closing!