Negative days and NSFs are related—but not interchangeable

We used to enter one combined “NSF count,” and it caused confusion because statement providers classify events differently.

Track negative ending days, returned items, overdraft events, and fees separately, along with the statement period.

Compare only the field the lender actually publishes. A maximum negative-day rule is not automatically an NSF rule.

What if the bank reverses a fee or the same returned debit appears twice in transaction data?

Keep the raw event references and deduplicate by transaction identity and reversal relationship before counting.

The merchant explanation should focus on observed cash-flow events, not imply misconduct from a bank fee.

I also want a manual override with a note when statement parsing clearly misclassifies an event.

Overrides need the original value, corrected value, reviewer, reason, and date so the audit trail remains intact.

Lender-specific definitions should be quoted or linked whenever possible because terminology varies.

Separate the measures, retain evidence, and match the exact published rule instead of collapsing everything into one count.