Payflow fraud review treated as decline about cfpayment HOT 2 OPEN

Pending is designed to indicate that the transaction has been sent to the gateway but the gateway has not responded yet so it wouldn't be a good fit here since the gateway did respond.

However, it would be useful for you to capture transactions with a response of 126 in your database with a different semantic for "pending". When I processed ACH, I did a similar thing, which was the gateway would say "we charged them", but we knew with ACH processing it would be a few days until you could confirm the bank transfer so locally we had an "in-progress" status in our database that we would review.

Does that seem to match with what you want to capture here?

from cfpayment.

Yes, that sounds very similar to this situation, and capturing some kind of "Transaction pending" response (as opposed to "server response pending") status would be useful.

From what I understand of the Payflow workflow, the transaction is created on the server side, and will be approved (or declined) at a later point in time. This means it would be unwise to re-issue the transaction, but you also don't want the merchant to ship the goods until you know it won't be declined. I seem to have triggered the fraud review response with a default setup of a test account, however I'm not sure if this is as likely to occur with a production gateway.

The level of detail in response code appears to exist in the payflow plugin, but the status is replaced by either "getStatusSuccess()" or "getStatusDeclined()" before being handed back to the calling code. I can understand that it is useful to standardise on return values so the calling code can know what to expect. Looking at it a bit more, this might be accessible via response.getParsedResult() - perhaps the calling code needs to confirm the nature of the decline from the ParsedResult.

from cfpayment.