Issue between Aircall & Pipedrive

Hi Support,

I’m Brice and I work for Aircall.
One of our customers contacted us regarding issues with their Pipedrive integration.
We checked the logs and found that when we search for phone numbers they are not found, so we ask for a new person to be created.
But according to the customer, the new person ID created is linked to an existing person, here is an example:

(402621) made an outbound call to 393924######
{“id”:341900684,“from”:“390694######”,“created_at”:“2020-11-10T13:37:59.000Z”,“updated_at”:“2020-11-10T13:38:00.000Z”,“direction”:“outbound”,“caller_name”:“390694######”,“hangup_cause”:null,“bill_rate”:“0.0”,“bill_duration”:0,“to”:“393924######”,“duration”:“0”,“call_uuid”:“CA2993baa7321c93eb5f5d100c9bac561e”,“call_status”:null,“event”:null,“state”:“initial”,“number_id”:168954,“record_url”:null,“recording_duration_ms”:0,“caller_picture_url”:null,“caller_first_name”:null,“caller_last_name”:null,“caller_country”:null,“caller_city”:null,“caller_country_code”:null,“to_user_id”:null,“from_user_id”:402621,“redirect_to”:“393924######”,“quality”:null,“cost”:“0.0”,“dest_category”:null,“deleted_at”:null,“has_been_treated”:false,“calls_requests”:"[]",“digits_requests”:[],“user_to_transfer_to_id”:null,“archived_at”:null,“calls_requests_map”:{},“reached_voicemail_at”:null,“answered_at”:null,“assigned_to_id”:null,“assigned_to_by_id”:null,“assigned_to_at”:null,“country_code_a2”:null,“pricing_type”:null,“live_record_url”:null,“internal_to_user_id”:null,“ended_at”:null,“number_was_closed”:false,“last_synchronized_at_ms”:null,“grouping_key”:null,“company_id”:286178,“missed_reason”:null,“tag_list”:null}

We asked if the number exists in customer account

e164
https://api-proxy.pipedrive.com/searchResults?field_type=personField&exact_match=0&return_item_ids=1&field_key=phone&term= +393924######

original
https://api-proxy.pipedrive.com/searchResults?field_type=personField&exact_match=0&return_item_ids=1&field_key=phone&term= 393924######

national
https://api-proxy.pipedrive.com/searchResults?field_type=personField&exact_match=0&return_item_ids=1&field_key=phone&term=392 4## ####

No results were found, so we asked to create the contact
POST https://api-proxy.pipedrive.com/persons
{“name”:“393924###### Aircall new contact”,“phone”:[{“label”:“work”,“value”:"+393924######",“primary”:true}]}

And here is the answer we got
response {
}
timestamp 2020-11-10T13:38:01.949135Z
data {
}
related_objects {
}
success true
active_flag true
activities_count 0
add_time 2020-11-10 13:38:01
cc_email ######@pipedrivemail.com
closed_deals_count 0
company_id 5380000
done_activities_count 0
email [
]
email_messages_count 0
files_count 0
first_char 3
followers_count 0
id 12764
last_name 393924###### Aircall new contact
lost_deals_count 0
name 393924###### Aircall new contact
notes_count 0
open_deals_count 0
owner_id {
}
owner_name Leticia ######
participant_closed_deals_count 0
participant_open_deals_count 0
phone [
]
related_closed_deals_count 0
related_lost_deals_count 0
related_open_deals_count 0
related_won_deals_count 0
undone_activities_count 0
update_time 2020-11-10 13:38:01
visible_to 3
won_deals_count 0
{“value”:"",“primary”:true}
active_flag true
email l######@######.com
has_pic 1
id 8434###
name Leticia ######
pic_hash db9d04166133814a93f5376afb4ddf29
value 8434###
{“label”:“work”,“value”:"+393924######",“primary”:true}
user {
}
8434### {
}
active_flag true
email l######@######.com
has_pic 1
id 8434###
name Leticia ######
pic_hash db9d04166133814a93f5376afb4ddf29

The person ID created for this call is 12764
Do you have any idea why we are not able to find the phone number even if the phone format is in E164? Why the new person created links them to an existing user?
Can we have the opportunity to make a screen share to check a call on both side and find the root cause of this issue?

Thanks for your help

Hey @Brice_Camprasse,

Could you DM me a good time to get on a call to go through a screenshare?

Can’t quite tell what might be the issue yet.

After talking with our team behind the Search feature, they noticed that you’re currently using the old search API (which will be deprecated in March).

Could you try migrating to the new Search API: New Search API migration guide