attestwireAttestwire › Rule reference › BR-DE-20
BR-DE-20 The debited account on a SEPA direct debit should be a valid IBAN
noun · XRechnung · warning · BT-91
For a sample invoice, the library reports: The payment means type code (BT-81) is "59" (SEPA direct debit), so the debited account identifier (BT-91) should be a valid IBAN — but "DE98700500001234567891" fails the ISO 7064 MOD-97-10 check digits.
Diese Regel auf Deutsch: BR-DE-20 — auf Deutsch erklärt.
- Business term
BT-91- Severity
warning
The fix
Set payment.directDebit.debitedAccount to the IBAN written on the signed mandate. Do not retype it from a bank statement, and do not normalise it — take the stored value.
A passing value
"directDebit": { "debitedAccount": "DE98700500001234567890" }What the library returns
The full error returned by @attestwire/en16931. It includes the rule ID,
affected field and suggested correction. Developers can use this object in their application:
{
"rule": "BR-DE-20",
"field": "BT-91",
"severity": "warning",
"message": "The payment means type code (BT-81) is \"59\" (SEPA direct debit), so the debited account identifier (BT-91) should be a valid IBAN — but \"DE98700500001234567891\" fails the ISO 7064 MOD-97-10 check digits. Positions 3 and 4 are a checksum over the rest of the number, so a single mistyped character makes them disagree. This matters more here than it does for your own account under BR-DE-19: a wrong IBAN on a credit transfer means nobody pays you, while a wrong IBAN on a direct debit means you attempt to collect from an account that is not the one on the mandate.",
"fix": "Set payment.directDebit.debitedAccount to the IBAN written on the signed mandate. Do not retype it from a bank statement, and do not normalise it — take the stored value.",
"example": "\"directDebit\": { \"debitedAccount\": \"DE98700500001234567890\" }",
"xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:PaymentMeans/cac:PaymentMandate/cac:PayerFinancialAccount/cbc:ID",
"docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-DE-20"
}
xpath is always a UBL path. On a CII invoice, look for the
matching CII field instead.