Why doesn't Koha send overdue notices for items with a lost status?
Hi list, To be clear, I know why it doesn't (overdue_notices.pl seems to limit its query for overdue items to those with items.itemlost = 0 in line 512). My question is what is the reason for that restriction? I realized recently that our third ODUE notice wasn't going out, and I think it's because we mark things with a Long Overdue lost status at 5 days. When the third notice is triggered at 30 days it's not sent because those items have a lost status. Is there are good reason for this limit? Would it be worthwhile for others to be able to send notices for things with a lost status? Should I open a bugzilla ticket? Cheers, Cindy ----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org
Hi Cindy, To me, if an item is lost, it's no longer overdue. It's lost. How about this : a patron comes in, declares they lost the item but can't pay for it right away (very honest of this hypothetical patron, I know). The item is not overdue yet. So the staff declares it lost. It stays in the patron's account. I wouldn't want that patron to receive overdue notices for this item. I would want them to receive overdue notices for their actual overdue items that they can return. I always set up my clients' installations so that the long overdue comes right after the last overdue notice. It seems logical to me, you send notices and send notices and after the last one, the patron is charged for the item they won't return. Is there a reason you declare the items long overdue after only five days, but still send notices after 30 days? Regards, Caroline On 2026-07-15 16:42, Cindy Murdock Ames via Koha wrote:
Hi list,
To be clear, I know why it doesn't (overdue_notices.pl seems to limit its query for overdue items to those with items.itemlost = 0 in line 512). My question is what is the reason for that restriction?
I realized recently that our third ODUE notice wasn't going out, and I think it's because we mark things with a Long Overdue lost status at 5 days. When the third notice is triggered at 30 days it's not sent because those items have a lost status. Is there are good reason for this limit? Would it be worthwhile for others to be able to send notices for things with a lost status? Should I open a bugzilla ticket?
Cheers, Cindy
----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org _______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
Caroline Cyr-La-Rose, M.L.I.S. (she/her) Librarian | Product Manager 1-833-INLIBRO (465-4276), ext. 221 caroline.cyr-la-rose@inlibro.com https://www.inLibro.com
Hi all, I agree with Caroline, but I can imagine that both opinions will have supporters. The workflow for lost items already has a lot of configuration options, maybe this should just be another? I couldn't find any bug reported yet. Katrin On 15.07.26 23:21, Caroline Cyr La Rose via Koha wrote:
Hi Cindy,
To me, if an item is lost, it's no longer overdue. It's lost.
How about this : a patron comes in, declares they lost the item but can't pay for it right away (very honest of this hypothetical patron, I know). The item is not overdue yet. So the staff declares it lost. It stays in the patron's account. I wouldn't want that patron to receive overdue notices for this item. I would want them to receive overdue notices for their actual overdue items that they can return.
I always set up my clients' installations so that the long overdue comes right after the last overdue notice. It seems logical to me, you send notices and send notices and after the last one, the patron is charged for the item they won't return.
Is there a reason you declare the items long overdue after only five days, but still send notices after 30 days?
Regards,
Caroline
On 2026-07-15 16:42, Cindy Murdock Ames via Koha wrote:
Hi list,
To be clear, I know why it doesn't (overdue_notices.pl seems to limit its query for overdue items to those with items.itemlost = 0 in line 512). My question is what is the reason for that restriction?
I realized recently that our third ODUE notice wasn't going out, and I think it's because we mark things with a Long Overdue lost status at 5 days. When the third notice is triggered at 30 days it's not sent because those items have a lost status. Is there are good reason for this limit? Would it be worthwhile for others to be able to send notices for things with a lost status? Should I open a bugzilla ticket?
Cheers, Cindy
----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org _______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
Caroline Cyr-La-Rose, M.L.I.S. (she/her) Librarian | Product Manager
1-833-INLIBRO (465-4276), ext. 221 caroline.cyr-la-rose@inlibro.com https://www.inLibro.com
_______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
Thanks for the responses. When our libraries went fine free, we decided to set up auto-renewals, so things get renewed the max number of times, and then at 5 days overdue after that they are marked with a lost status of Long Overdue and they're charged the replacement fee, and we keep the item checked out on their card but their account usage is restricted as a result of the replacement fee. Then at 90 days, they are checked in and their lost status is set to "Lost but Never Paid" so we know that patron hasn't paid for the item yet. It's more convoluted than I would like, but that's what our libraries decided on as a way to make people accountable for what they've borrowed without actually charging fines. If they bring the item back the replacement charges are forgiven unless it's been so long that a replacement has already been purchased. So we wanted to send that third notice at 30 days in the hopes of getting these things back. Cindy ----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org Please report tech support issues in Mantis: https://mantis.ccfls.org On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 5:21 PM Caroline Cyr La Rose via Koha < koha@lists.katipo.co.nz> wrote:
Hi Cindy,
To me, if an item is lost, it's no longer overdue. It's lost.
How about this : a patron comes in, declares they lost the item but can't pay for it right away (very honest of this hypothetical patron, I know). The item is not overdue yet. So the staff declares it lost. It stays in the patron's account. I wouldn't want that patron to receive overdue notices for this item. I would want them to receive overdue notices for their actual overdue items that they can return.
I always set up my clients' installations so that the long overdue comes right after the last overdue notice. It seems logical to me, you send notices and send notices and after the last one, the patron is charged for the item they won't return.
Is there a reason you declare the items long overdue after only five days, but still send notices after 30 days?
Regards,
Caroline
On 2026-07-15 16:42, Cindy Murdock Ames via Koha wrote:
Hi list,
To be clear, I know why it doesn't (overdue_notices.pl seems to limit its query for overdue items to those with items.itemlost = 0 in line 512). My question is what is the reason for that restriction?
I realized recently that our third ODUE notice wasn't going out, and I think it's because we mark things with a Long Overdue lost status at 5 days. When the third notice is triggered at 30 days it's not sent because those items have a lost status. Is there are good reason for this limit? Would it be worthwhile for others to be able to send notices for things with a lost status? Should I open a bugzilla ticket?
Cheers, Cindy
----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org _______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
Caroline Cyr-La-Rose, M.L.I.S. (she/her) Librarian | Product Manager
1-833-INLIBRO (465-4276), ext. 221 caroline.cyr-la-rose@inlibro.com https://www.inLibro.com
_______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
I added a bug report for it in case anyone else would find such an option useful too: https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=43149 ----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org Please report tech support issues in Mantis: https://mantis.ccfls.org On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 12:59 PM Cindy Murdock Ames <cmurdock@ccfls.org> wrote:
Thanks for the responses. When our libraries went fine free, we decided to set up auto-renewals, so things get renewed the max number of times, and then at 5 days overdue after that they are marked with a lost status of Long Overdue and they're charged the replacement fee, and we keep the item checked out on their card but their account usage is restricted as a result of the replacement fee. Then at 90 days, they are checked in and their lost status is set to "Lost but Never Paid" so we know that patron hasn't paid for the item yet. It's more convoluted than I would like, but that's what our libraries decided on as a way to make people accountable for what they've borrowed without actually charging fines. If they bring the item back the replacement charges are forgiven unless it's been so long that a replacement has already been purchased. So we wanted to send that third notice at 30 days in the hopes of getting these things back.
Cindy
----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org
Please report tech support issues in Mantis: https://mantis.ccfls.org
On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 5:21 PM Caroline Cyr La Rose via Koha < koha@lists.katipo.co.nz> wrote:
Hi Cindy,
To me, if an item is lost, it's no longer overdue. It's lost.
How about this : a patron comes in, declares they lost the item but can't pay for it right away (very honest of this hypothetical patron, I know). The item is not overdue yet. So the staff declares it lost. It stays in the patron's account. I wouldn't want that patron to receive overdue notices for this item. I would want them to receive overdue notices for their actual overdue items that they can return.
I always set up my clients' installations so that the long overdue comes right after the last overdue notice. It seems logical to me, you send notices and send notices and after the last one, the patron is charged for the item they won't return.
Is there a reason you declare the items long overdue after only five days, but still send notices after 30 days?
Regards,
Caroline
Hi list,
To be clear, I know why it doesn't (overdue_notices.pl seems to limit its query for overdue items to those with items.itemlost = 0 in line 512). My question is what is the reason for that restriction?
I realized recently that our third ODUE notice wasn't going out, and I think it's because we mark things with a Long Overdue lost status at 5 days. When the third notice is triggered at 30 days it's not sent because those items have a lost status. Is there are good reason for this
On 2026-07-15 16:42, Cindy Murdock Ames via Koha wrote: limit?
Would it be worthwhile for others to be able to send notices for things with a lost status? Should I open a bugzilla ticket?
Cheers, Cindy
----------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Murdock Ames Network Administrator Meadville Public Library | CCFLS https://meadvillelibrary.org | https://ccfls.org _______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
Caroline Cyr-La-Rose, M.L.I.S. (she/her) Librarian | Product Manager
1-833-INLIBRO (465-4276), ext. 221 caroline.cyr-la-rose@inlibro.com https://www.inLibro.com
_______________________________________________
Koha mailing list -- koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://koha-community.org To unsubscribe send an email to koha-leave@lists.katipo.co.nz Unsubscribe:
participants (3)
-
Caroline Cyr La Rose -
Cindy Murdock Ames -
Katrin Fischer