Rule reference

BR-61 The payment means type code (BT-81) is "58", which means a credit transfer, so the payment account identifier (BT-84) must be present

The payment means type code (BT-81) is "58", which means a credit transfer, so the payment account identifier (BT-84) must be present. You have told the buyer to transfer money without saying where to.

This rule is implemented and its error payload below is real, but the long-form write-up — normative text, worked example, divergence note — is not written yet. Everything the library knows about this rule is on this page. Ask and we will prioritise it.

Business term
BT-84
Severity
fatal

What the library returns

The exact object in result.errors when this rule fires. Generated by running @attestwire/en16931, not transcribed:

TeachingError
{
  "rule": "BR-61",
  "field": "BT-84",
  "severity": "fatal",
  "message": "The payment means type code (BT-81) is \"58\", which means a credit transfer, so the payment account identifier (BT-84) must be present. You have told the buyer to transfer money without saying where to.",
  "fix": "Set payment.iban to the receiving account (IBAN inside SEPA). Add payment.bic only if the account is outside SEPA or your bank requires it.",
  "example": "\"payment\": { \"meansCode\": \"58\", \"iban\": \"DE02120300000000202051\" }",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:PaymentMeans/cac:PayeeFinancialAccount/cbc:ID",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-61"
}

xpath locates the element in the generated UBL document, which is where a KoSIT or Peppol validator will report the same problem.

A passing value

the shape this field expects
"payment": { "meansCode": "58", "iban": "DE02120300000000202051" }

The fix

Set payment.iban to the receiving account (IBAN inside SEPA). Add payment.bic only if the account is outside SEPA or your bank requires it.

Arrived from a stack trace? The docsUrl on every error links straight here. Something wrong on this page — tell us.