Re: Failure to renew material

[May Anstee <m-anstee@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Alannah:
We find that loan rule 1 (non circulating) is applied whenever someone 
overrules a block originating from a ptype restriction.  We don't have 
many, but whenever staff overruled a ptype block, loan rule 1 was 
applied.  They would change the due date, but all other aspects of the loan 
rule applied, including non renewal.

May

At 03:53 PM 2/4/2003, you wrote:

>At Waterloo Public Library I have just this week had two reports of customers
>being unable to renew items that should have been renewable.  One customer
>returned the items before I was able to determine what the cause of the
>problem was.
>
>However, the second case was more perplexing and is in the hands of the help
>desk.  The item which would not renew had a loan rule 1, which is our
>non-circulating loan rule.  This, at least, explains the failure to renew
>because there is no provision for renewal in the non-circulating loan-rule.
>But why was this loan rule applied?  When I checked the i-type, p-type,and
>location code the combination should have invoked a loan rule 40 but it did
>not.  There are no errors in the item record and the loan rule selection
>table is correct.  Why the system assigned loan rule 1 is still a mystery.
>
>Alannah
>
>Alannah Hegedus, Circulation Librarian
>Waterloo Public Library
>35 Albert St., Waterloo, Ontario N2L 5E2
>519-886-1310 ext. 27
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Barb Anderson [mailto:bja9@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 2:03 PM
>To: innopac@xxxxxxxxxx; innocirc
>Subject: patron requests not updating
>
>
>I apologize for sending this to both lists, but I can't remember which one
>had the original discussion on it.
>Several people mentioned getting messages from patrons saying they had
>renewed material and it wasn't showing on their record afterwards, but
>nobody had an example.  I think I may have run across an example while
>trying to clean up some duplicate patron records--a patron with an
>INN-Reach item that shows one due date on his record and another on the
>item record in our central catalog at OhioLINK (as if there was a renewal
>request on it, and the item is waiting for a system update to it to make
>this even more likely).  I've got a call open with Innovative on this with
>all the pertinent record numbers.  The call is 658882 if you get a similar
>report and want to cite the existing call.  You may also want to check the
>catalog or central catalog to see if the due date in the patron record
>matched the due date showing in your catalog.  Perhaps it is related to the
>locking records problems from going to Phase 2??
>Barb Anderson
>
>Barbara J. Anderson
>Library Systems Specialist
>Kelvin Smith Library
>Case Western Reserve University
>11055 Euclid Ave.
>Cleveland, OH 44106-7151
>
>bja9@xxxxxxxxxx
>(voice) 216-368-2666
>(fax) 216-368-6506
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>InnoCirc mailing list
>InnoCirc@xxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.umd.umich.edu/mailman/listinfo/innocirc
>
>--
>This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC list
>Public replies:  INNOPAC@xxxxxxxxxx
>Update your subscription options: 
>http://innopacusers.org/list/listinfo/innopac

May Anstee                                      Helen M. Plum Memorial Library
Head, Technical Processing                      110 W. Maple St.
Automation Coordinator                  Lombard, IL 60148

                 email   m-anstee@xxxxxxxxxx
                 Phone   (630) 627-0316
                 Fax     (630) 627-0336
                 <http://plum.lib.il.us>