Why are "Explained Transactions" pushed to Freeagent auto-formatted?


We’re working on integrating with Freeagent, via Codat.
As part of our development and testing, we’ve pushed some transactions into an account.

We spent some time deliberating how the description field should be populated on our side for a user-friendly appearance.

On “Explaining” some of these transactions, we find that delimiters in we had put in place (as part of the description) have disappeared, along with casing changes.

Please find a screen shot below which illustrates differences between Explained and Unexplained transactions:

Is this auto-formatting by design? If so, are there any options when pushing transactions to your platform, that would prevent this auto-formatting taking place when transactions are Explained?

Or, better still, are there account settings which (we are unaware of) to manage this?


Hi, John.

It doesn’t look like your screenshot came through. Would you mind terribly reposting it? In the mean time, I’ll look into your question more generally.


Hi Pat,

Would appear it’s expired since posting

Should be reattached now


Hello John,

Yes you are right, we are autoformatting this at the moment. When you open the inline form to explain a transaction, we automatically get the name of the transaction and try to propose to you a more readable description for your explanation (this is auto populated in the description field). You can always change this suggestion by editing the description field in the inline form to re-add the delimiters before you explain the transaction.

Let me know if this answers your questions.


Hi Eva,

Thanks for your response and confirming the behaviour here.
Is there a way for this behaviour to be optional? Perhaps a toggle in settings or something?

We’re looking to offer the pushing of customers’ transactions into accounting packages like freeagent as a convenience.
As a party (credit card) integrating with and pushing transactions into freeagent, via. Codat, we rely on the descriptions to remain consistent and in a format we wish to display to our customers.

It would be untenable to suggest to customers that they ought to manually amend

Additionally, we’re using the description field to persist a “hash” to uniquely identify transactions. While we already know this is not ideal, and fragile at best, this is in lieu of a correlation Id we can use with all accounting packages via. codat.

Hello again John,

There is currently no way for this behaviour to be optional. I have passed your feature request to our product manager.

Apologies for the inconvenience.