PC-775 - Allow journey to be completed by users in "Pending" LAs

[Glenn-Clarke]

THIS PR BUILDS UPON PC-776

Updated the user journey to allow those who select a "pending" status LA to continue their journey by acknowledging that they won't have their application processed at the current time, and not until the LA begins processing applications.

If the user acknowledges this, they are directed to the income check page, as if they had been part of an "active" LA.

[jdgage]

I think something like

Suggested change

	[Compare("isTrue", ErrorMessage = "You must acknowledge that your application will not be processed until your local authority has signed up to use the service")]
	[Range(typeof(bool), "true", "true", ErrorMessage="...")]

might work? Which would save us the extra property. And if so then it might be nice to extract it to a custom attribute?

Otherwise let's use nameof(isTrue) to keep us robust to renames.

[Glenn-Clarke]

I didn't realise you could use the Range validation attribute for booleans! It does seem to work when I've been testing it.
I've changed this over, but I can't figure out how to cleanly separate it into its own custom attribute.

[jamiehumphries]

The Range thing feels a bit weird to me. It's not very obvious what is going on.

I think you're better off just being explicit about the validation.

You can make the view model implement IValidatableObject:

public class PendingViewModel : QuestionFlowViewModel, IValidatableObject
{

then implement Validate() as follows:

public IEnumerable<ValidationResult> Validate(ValidationContext validationContext)
{
    if (!UserAcknowledgesApplicationNotProcessedUntilLocalAuthorityLive)
    {
        yield return new ValidationResult(
            "You must acknowledge that your application will not be processed until your local authority has signed up to use the service",
            new[] { nameof(UserAcknowledgesApplicationNotProcessedUntilLocalAuthorityLive) });
    }
}

Let me know if it would be useful to chat through what is going on here. 🙂

[jdgage]

Happy to jump on a call to go through it if you want! Don't think this needs to be a blocker though

[Glenn-Clarke]

Though I've just seen Jamie's spoilers, I would be interested in also knowing how to implement it as a custom attribute!

[jdgage]

Sure, we can chat about it tomorrow if you like

[jamiehumphries]

The Range thing feels a bit weird to me. It's not very obvious what is going on.

I think you're better off just being explicit about the validation.

You can make the view model implement IValidatableObject:

public class PendingViewModel : QuestionFlowViewModel, IValidatableObject
{

then implement Validate() as follows:

public IEnumerable<ValidationResult> Validate(ValidationContext validationContext)
{
    if (!UserAcknowledgesApplicationNotProcessedUntilLocalAuthorityLive)
    {
        yield return new ValidationResult(
            "You must acknowledge that your application will not be processed until your local authority has signed up to use the service",
            new[] { nameof(UserAcknowledgesApplicationNotProcessedUntilLocalAuthorityLive) });
    }
}

Let me know if it would be useful to chat through what is going on here. 🙂

[jamiehumphries]

⚠️ I don't think that this flow is always correct.

SelectAddressForwardDestination() (which is the point we should be picking up from) has the following options for next steps:

else if (questionnaire.FoundEpcBandIsTooHigh)
{
    return QuestionFlowStep.ReviewEpc;
}
// If the LA has changed and the income band the user selected previously is no longer valid then we don't
// go back to the check your answers page as the user will need to select a new income band.
else if (entryPoint is QuestionFlowStep.Address && questionnaire.IncomeBandIsValid)
{
    return QuestionFlowStep.CheckAnswers;
}

return QuestionFlowStep.HouseholdIncome;

I think we need to clarify with DESNZ what we should be doing if we should be showing the ReviewEpc step.

I would expect that we should show that in preference to the Pending page.

[Glenn-Clarke]

For now, I've moved the ReviewEPC check so it catches people before they're caught by the Pending check :)

[jamiehumphries]

Thanks @Glenn-Clarke. That being the case, we need to also change the options in ReviewEpcForwardDestination() to potentially forward you to Pending.

[jamiehumphries]

This is all looking good for the most part, however I think there are still some complications around the question flow.

I've added comments, but let me know if it would be easier to chat them through as it is quite nitty-gritty.

[jamiehumphries]

Thanks @Glenn-Clarke. That being the case, we need to also change the options in ReviewEpcForwardDestination() to potentially forward you to Pending.

[Glenn-Clarke]

Just pushing before end of day, still need to check it over tomorrow morning to fix issues