What sticks out to me is that there is no corresponding "edit" privilege set and user in the Reports file.
I'm not sure why you have these tables in separate files. If you wanted a separate file it may have been easier to have the second file as the "interface" file which only showed records by a relationship to visits which in turn related to reports. It is a bit hard to know without more info about the sort of interface you want to achieve.
You could make the CC the account name and then have the CC auto-entered into the global CC field which then shows by relationship and security only the associated Reports. If the user then opens the reports table it only allows them to see the records where that global (or the Account name) matches... ie regardless of layout.
What you have done make no sense to me... why is the visits table even necessary? All the data you need is in the Reports table. You just want to restrict it to where G CC Code = CC Code.
Thanks for your response. I need to prevent users in CC 1 from viewing records in CC 2 in the reports file. However in the visits file, I want everyone, regardless of CC to view certain fields for ALL records in the reports file. In the 'real solution' there are 'edit' privilages in each file, so I don't think thats the problem.
The real issue is that this WORKS when working on the main file but not on a client file when shared. In fact this can be tested using peer to peer as I've just discovered.