Create Customer Error 500 Where Type=Business

API Support
1

I can successfully access the API and create “unverified” accounts in sandbox mode. When I run the same code, but add the required fields for a verified account and more specifically, change type from “unverified” to “business”, I get an Error 500.
{“code”:“ServerError”,“message”:“A server error occurred. Error ID: fefbe9fb-36bb-4dd5-945a-c64b0d183289.”}

2

Hi @acirinelli, It looks like there may have been an intermittent issue on our end when calling to create a Customer in the Sandbox. Can you reattempt the request to confirm? If any error occurs, please reply back with your raw request body.

3 
$customerURL = $customersApi->create([
    'firstName' => $request->get('firstName'),
    'lastName' => $request->get('lastName'),
    'email' => $request->get('email'),
    'ipAddress' => $request->ip(),
    'type' => 'business',
    'address1' => $request->get('address1'),
    'address2' => $request->get('address2'),
    'city' => $request->get('city'),
    'state' => $request->get('state'),
    'postalCode' => $request->get('postalCode'),
    'dateOfBirth' => $request->get('dateOfBirth_year') . '-' . $request->get('dateOfBirth_month') , '-' . $request->get('dateOfBirth_day'),
    'ssn' => $request->get('ssn'),
    'businessClassification' => '9ed38139-7d6f-11e3-bf69-5404a6144203',
    'businessType' => $request->get('businessType'),
    'businessName' => $request->get('businessName'),
    'ein' => $request->get('ein'),
    'doingBusinessAs' => $request->get('doingBusinessAs')
]);

Using the dwolla/dwolla-swagger php package.
If I change ‘type’ => ‘business’ to ‘type’ => ‘unverified’ (even though I don’t need all those parameters), it works.

5

@spencer wow… I’m very much embarrassed right now. I found the problem. On the dateOfBirth line, there is a “,” that should be a “.” I didn’t see anything about it in the debug code last night, but I see it now – everything is working ok. Please go ahead and close or remove this issue.

6

No worries @acirinelli! Thanks for letting us know about this issue as we should have returned a validation error in this instance instead of a HTTP 500.