Jump to content

Unable archive user - documents owned

Recommended Posts


I have a user that has left our organisation, main AD account is disabled, but it causing an error as they are still Active in Hornbill.  When trying to manually archive the account, it comes up with the following error: 



This user was set as a Hornbill User, but didn't have any document permissions to create documents.  I have done a check, and there are no documents owner by this user, so I'm not sure what it could be referring to.  

I've been able to downgrade the user from User status to Basic no problem, and all User rights and team access removed, so it is now just a Basic account. 


Any suggestions/ideas on where to look would be appreciated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually, the process of moving a user account to a basic account will remove any aspect of ownership.  I can only think that there is something not quite right with the underlying data.  In this case, it might be worth raising a request with Hornbill Support as they will be able to have a look at the data.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies, it transpires that a Basic User is not displayed in the list of Document Owners.

This is being looked into internally, the workaround is (as you may have guessed):

  1. Promote the Basic User back to a Full User
  2. Reload the 'Change Ownership' page
  3. Re-assign owned documents in the usual way
  4. Demote the Full User to Basic
  5. Archive the User


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a thought on this, would it be possible to put something in place when downgrading an account from User to Basic some kind of message, letting you know that they have documents assigned to them, like when there are outstanding activities? Would help with issues like this happening again in the future. 

@Steve Giller / @James Ainsworth ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Emily Patrick This is something that we are investigating at present.

There isn't a "quick fix" for this as there are various entities in various different applications that can be owned, so the process will need to cater for all of these (and allow for new ones to be included) but this is a story that is being progressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Steve Giller Thanks for the response.  The fact that it's something that is already being investigated is promising, and hopefully will come to something in the future. 

I wasn't necessarily looking for a quick permanent fix, just more of something to see if it's possible to be done in the future. 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...