3 section check

Hello guys I am working in a check to transfer the print form from Crystal to SSRS.

The problem is that the check in Crystal is a 3 part check which means

section 1 -> table with invoice number

section 2 -> Check

Section 3 -> table with same invoice numbers

In SSRS i cannot use sub-reports or Tables in the footer like in crystal. does anybody have an idea how to archive this form in SSRS?

PS: I already try referencing the table in the footer, but it didn’t works, and if I reference a text field, it just return the last value of the list

Use rectangles to position the three-parts properly

Rectangle #1 - 1/3 height x width of check containing the Invoice Detail
Rectangle #2 - 2/3 height x width of check containing text boxes with the
check details placed in the correct positions.
Rectangle #3 - Full height x width of the check containing a Copy/Paste of
the Detail Table and adding an additional row to the table above and
outside the highest group. The height of this row should be 2/3 height of
the check to position the table properly below the check detail.

All rectangles are located at 0, 0 in the body of the report, essentially
overlapping so they will not affect each others position. No Header, No
Footer required.


Brian M. Garver
Northern Concrete Pipe, Inc.

We have accomplished this before, however it is a royal PAIN. Generally we try to push customers towards the more standard 1 stub/ 1 check. 2 Stub checks are really not necessary any more and they create a storage nightmare.
If you are set on accomplishing this, look at using some dynamic code within SSRS to push the sizes of rectangles around based on how many lines you have in a check.
Also you might be better off doing 2 stubs and check at the bottom.

1 Like

Could you please explain me what does the code have to perform in order to do this?

i tried that and it didnt works but thanks

Also alex I see you posted this in E9 section. are you in E9? If so I highly discourage you from converting stuff to SSRS in E9 with the hopes it will translate to E10… (it won’t…)

I am sorry i am converting all crystal reports to SSRS because we are moving to 10.1

ok, but you are doing to conversion on your 10.1 SSRS DB NOT your E9 SSRS right?

exactly i am converting in 10.1

when i did that, i had a problem. When accounting print a batch of checks the check shows op starting in the last page for example the invoices in the table for 5 invoices show up from page 1 to 5 and the check from page 5 to 10 how can i make the check to show from page 1 to -5 with the table

Are you getting the (2) tables to display on the same page as wanted? If
so, try eliminating the second rectangle and placing the check detail
fields in the second table in the top row. Also, check your page breaks
for each group. I had to do quite a bit of trial and error to get the page
breaks and alignment right, after figuring out how to get the same table
twice on the same page.


Brian M. Garver
Northern Concrete Pipe, Inc.

i have no page brake i can make both table show but in the same way the check is showing like i explained before.
would you mind to send me your RDL file (with out any important information of course) so i can fill it out with my info

Ours is slightly different because it is check, table, table. So our check
detail is in the report header with duplicating tables in the body.
Hopefully this will help.


Brian M. Garver
Northern Concrete Pipe, Inc.
ChkPrint.rdl (127.5 KB)

I can still use it i figure it out how to put the check in the middle i just need to duplicate the table

thank you so much for sharing the file

thanks it is working i just have a concern what will happen when there is like 20 lines the lines will overlap?

You set the number of invoices you want per table in Bank Account Maintenance.

If the number of invoices exceeds this, it will automatically void the next check number and continue the detail on the following check.

Please mark the solution if a user has solved the issue.

1 Like

you can try but after work in the solution of BMgarver it wasnt a good option for my company

Have you found a solution? Posting will help others if they have the same question. Otherwise, does anyone else have a possible solution?