My #1 complaint and the biggest pain point for my team is that the "As of Aging" report (AP/AR aging) cannot be configured to run based on financial period, only document date (i.e. the vendor's invoice date), so for our purposes the output is basically worthless. This has caused dozens, if not hundreds, of hours of additional work for my team in order to provide something workable to our auditors, and we have lost visibility into true discrepancies between our AP subledger and our GL because we instead spend hours trying to reconcile timing differences that are not really variances.
Check printing is also incredibly inefficient because our company uses blank check stock and we had to implement Conga software since FFA itself does not allow printing on blank check stock. The process itself is very slow and inefficient since Conga is really a mail merge software and not designed for check printing. I wish FF and our consultants had been upfront about these limitations before selling us on using Conga because if we had known about this ahead of time, we might have made a business decision to switch to preprinted check stock. Furthermore, FFA does not allow printing a check without first creating an invoice, so in cases where we wouldn't normally have an invoice to cut a check, we are forced to create an invoice, unapply it from the check after printing the check, and credit out the invoice, which is time-consuming and clogs up our GL.
Another complaint is the low line limits on various documents, such as journal entries, purchase requisitions, payable invoices, etc. The fact that we need to break some of these items into multiple documents creates a lot of unnecessary work for my team, and we don't understand why there are such low line limitations (e.g. 80 lines for invoices).
Really investigate the limitations of the system before selecting it. It may work well for other companies, but we have had serious issues and inefficiencies with the aging reports, check printing and line limitations.