We agree that there needs to be a fix and a couple of us had additional questions/suggestions that might be helpful to have during analysis.  I have included those comments as an attachment.

The original request was for a code that would reflect the forfeiture of bail or bond separately from fines and fees.

This enhancement would reduce the amount of time clerks spend correcting errors and re-entering fine amounts.

The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) would implement a new process in JIS to receipt cash bail (or paper bond) that is ordered forfeited.  As part of the endorsement, The District and Municipal Court Management Association modified the request by stating that a different code may not be a satisfactory solution.  They further asked that the bail/bond accounting be kept separate from the defendant’s accounts receivable.  In line with the endorsement, AOC would keep the other accounts receivable separate from the accounting for bail/bond.

The process would likely continue to involve the Bail/Bond Disposition (BBD) screen to forfeit the bail and the Post Bail/Bond (PBB) screen to make the forfeiture money amount payable.

Either on the Create Accounts Receivable (CAR) screen or on a new JIS screen, the user would create the new account receivable for the amount of the forfeited bail.  The process would leave undisturbed the case’s other (billed or unbilled) accounts receivable.

The court would be able to receipt the forfeited bail without impacting the case’s other accounts receivable.  The receipted forfeited bail would be directly applied to the forfeited bail account receivable, and the system would make a corresponding automated docket entry.