ORIGINAL COMPANY-CONTEXT PRACTICE
Reconcile deposits that cross reporting boundaries
Original practice scenario: A simulated bank receives deposit notifications, ledger postings and reversals on different days. Explain how to reconcile outstanding deposits at a cutoff.
Written for independent practice using company context; this is not a verified question from a company interview.
A REASONED APPROACH
Model answer.
Reconciliation compares two independently defined event sets at the same cutoff. Joining by customer and amount alone can incorrectly match unrelated transactions or hide delayed postings.
Work through it
- Use stable deposit references and accepted event revisions, retaining notification time, posting time and effective date separately.
- Aggregate each side to one row per reference before joining; classify matched, pending, reversed and conflicting amounts under explicit rules.
- Test duplicate notifications, same-amount deposits, partial adjustments and late postings, and reconcile opening outstanding balances plus movements to closing balances.
Tradeoffs to discuss
- A longer matching window reduces false exceptions but delays discovery; unresolved cases should remain visible rather than being forced into matches.
Common pitfalls
- Do not exclude unmatched records through an inner join.
- Keep cutoff timezone and the treatment of later corrections consistent across both sides.