Issue Creating Vendor Bill in Dynamic Mode via Restlet
I’m trying to create a Vendor Bill in dynamic mode inside the POST method of a Restlet script.
The issue I’m experiencing is that I cannot set some fields, specifically:
-
subsidiary -
location -
department -
class
Here is the error I’m getting:
{
"type": "error.SuiteScriptError",
"name": "INVALID_FLD_VALUE",
"message": "You have entered an Invalid Field Value 5 for the following field: subsidiary"
}
Code snippet:
const transactionRec = record.create({ type: record.Type.VENDOR_BILL, isDynamic: true, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'entity', value: requestBody.body.vendor, ignoreFieldChange: true, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'subsidiary', value: requestBody.body.subsidiary, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'currency', value: requestBody.body.currency, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'tranid', value: requestBody.body.tranid, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'memo', value: requestBody.body.memo, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'department', value: requestBody.body.department, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'location', value: requestBody.body.location, }); transactionRec.setValue({ fieldId: 'class', value: requestBody.body.class, });
What I’ve checked so far:
-
The role executing the script has all the required permissions.
-
The value I’m trying to set is valid (the record is active and accessible).
-
Setting the fields in the UI in the same order as the script works.
-
Using
ignoreFieldChange: trueinsetValue()did not help.
Would really appreciate any insights, workarounds, or explanations — I might be missing something simple here. Thanks in advance!
P.S. Unfortunately, I cannot use standard mode for creating this transaction, because I need dynamic mode to set SuiteTax details on line items.




accountingnerd
I noticed that you have the
ignoreFieldChangedset to true when setting the vendor ID. Is there a reason for that? I wouldn’t have thought that would affect something like this, but perhaps it does.Can you confirm that the vendor in question is setup as part of Subsidiary 5? I’ve done a lot of stuff with subsidiaries and vendors, and not having the vendor/subsidiary relationship set up is somewhat common (in my experience).