[Due for payment 2025-05-20] [$250]Report - Not Found page is displayed when opening user's chat after paying invoice

[jponikarchuk]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.1.28-1
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: N/A
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: N/A
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: MacOS Chrome, Desktop
App Component: Chat Report View

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• User A has a workspace with invoicing enabled. (User A: [email protected])
• User B does not have any workspace. (User B: [email protected])
• User A and B do not have chat history with each other.

1. [User A] Send an invoice to User B.
2. [User B] Go to Reports > Chats.
3. [User B] Click Pay.
4. [User B] Click Pay as business > Pay elsewhere.
5. [User B] Click on the workspace avatar > Members > Click on User A’s profile > Click on Message button

Expected Result:

User B should be navigated to a chat with user A

Actual Result:

Not found page is displayed, and an undefined value is displayed in the URL

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021914790682113304013
• Upwork Job ID: 1914790682113304013
• Last Price Increase: 2025-04-22

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @twisterdotcom

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @RachCHopkins (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[bernhardoj]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-04-15 10:00:43 UTC.

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Not found report when we press the message button after receiving invoice.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When we receive the invoice and then press the Message button on the new user profile page, we call navigateToAndOpenReportWithAccountIDs.

App/src/libs/actions/Report.ts

Lines 1300 to 1312 in bd8186e

	function navigateToAndOpenReportWithAccountIDs(participantAccountIDs: number[]) {
	let newChat: OptimisticChatReport | undefined;
	const chat = getChatByParticipants([...participantAccountIDs, currentUserAccountID]);
	if (!chat) {
	newChat = buildOptimisticChatReport({
	participantList: [...participantAccountIDs, currentUserAccountID],
	});
	}
	const report = chat ?? newChat;
	// We want to pass newChat here because if anything is passed in that param (even an existing chat), we will try to create a chat on the server
	openReport(report?.reportID, '', [], newChat, '0', false, participantAccountIDs);
	Navigation.navigateToReportWithPolicyCheck({report});

It first finds the existing chat between the users, and if not found, it will create a new report. In our case, we don't have it yet, but getChatByParticipants returns a result, but the report object doesn't have the reportID, basically the data is incomplete. The data is received from the Pusher when receiving the invoice.

Since the reportID is undefined, we are navigated to the r/undefined page.

After further investigation, the incomplete report object is the invoice transaction thread.

It's considered a one-on-one chat.

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 2207 to 2216 in 1493af6

	function isOneOnOneChat(report: OnyxEntry<Report>): boolean {
	const participants = report?.participants ?? {};
	const participant = currentUserAccountID ? participants[currentUserAccountID] : undefined;
	const isCurrentUserParticipant = participant ? 1 : 0;
	const participantAmount = Object.keys(participants).length - isCurrentUserParticipant;
	if (participantAmount !== 1) {
	return false;
	}
	return !isChatRoom(report) && !isExpenseRequest(report) && !isMoneyRequestReport(report) && !isPolicyExpenseChat(report) && !isTaskReport(report) && isDM(report) && !isIOUReport(report);
	}

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We need to also check whether the report has reportID or not to decide whether we want to create a new report or not.

const chat = getChatByParticipants([...participantAccountIDs, currentUserAccountID]);
if (!chat?.reportID) {
    newChat = buildOptimisticChatReport({
        participantList: [...participantAccountIDs, currentUserAccountID],
    });
}
const report = newChat ?? chat;

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

We can test by calling navigateToAndOpenReportWithAccountIDs and make sure navigateToReportWithPolicyCheck is called with a report object that has the reportID, even though getChatByParticipants returns an incomplete report data.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Update isOneOnOneChat (or isDM) to return true if the report has policyID of _FAKE_.

[RachCHopkins]

Sorry, I'm OOO until the 28th and I haven't had time to triage this yet. Reassigning.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @Christinadobrzyn (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[Christinadobrzyn]

I can't get this to work, I think everything is broken today in NewDot. I'll try on Monday

[Christinadobrzyn]

Okay, I got this to work. I think it is resolved, I was routed to the chat with User A when clicking the message. I'll ask QA to test.

https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C9YU7BX5M/p1745269473227699

[Christinadobrzyn]

@bernhardoj are you still getting this error?

[IuliiaHerets]

Issue is still reproducible

Screen.Recording.2025-04-22.at.7.46.36.in.the.morning.mp4

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021914790682113304013

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @mananjadhav (External)

[Christinadobrzyn]

@mananjadhav, can you check this proposal when you have a moment? #60253 (comment)

[mananjadhav]

@bernhardoj's proposal looks good to me.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.1.44-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix not found page shows when open new user DM from profile page after receiving invoice #61089

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-05-20. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @mananjadhav requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @bernhardoj requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav @Christinadobrzyn @mananjadhav The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[Christinadobrzyn]

@mananjadhav Do we need a regression test?

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @mananjadhav owed $250 via NewDot
• Reviewer: @bernhardoj owed $250 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@Christinadobrzyn)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the necessary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants/1914790682113304013/hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[Christinadobrzyn]

@mananjadhav do we need a regression test?

[Christinadobrzyn]

Just a heads up that I'm going to be ooo May 21st - May 27th. Back on the 28th.

I'll assign someone to pay this. Payment summary - #60253 (comment)

We're just waiting on the regression test step. cc @twisterdotcom

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @twisterdotcom (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[twisterdotcom]

Starring @mananjadhav for the checklist.

[mananjadhav]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production (eg. bug slipped through the normal regression and PR testing process on staging)
• 2b. Reported on staging (eg. found during regression or PR testing)
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.

  Link to comment:

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner.

  Link to discussion:

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

• We need a new user and an existing user.

Test:

1. [User B] Sign up as a new user
2. [User B] Create a new workspace and enable invoices
3. [User B] Send an invoice to User A
4. [User A] Open the invoice room
5. [User A] Press the report header > Members
6. [User A] Press the User B
7. [User A] Press Message on the profile page
8. [User A] Verify the User B chat is open

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[mananjadhav]

@Christinadobrzyn @twisterdotcom I think it makes sense to add a regression test for this one. Suggested one from the PR. I haven't been able to spend time on finding the offending PR.

Will do try to do that. Meanwhile @bernhardoj do you have any idea on the offending PR?

[bernhardoj]

Based on my root cause, I don't think there is an offending PR. The isOneOnOneChat logic is quite old. I think it's more of an issue that has recently been noticed by QA when performing the test steps where the user receives the incomplete report data.

[twisterdotcom]

Payment Summary:

• Reviewer: @mananjadhav owed $250 via NewDot
• Reviewer: @bernhardoj owed $250 via NewDot

[bernhardoj]

Requested in ND.

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @bernhardoj