[Guest]

My first post here, a logic puzzle that I made up by myself. I checked key words, and nothing came up, so here it goes:

_________________________________________

An old jerk who lives in a house alone is writing a cheque for ten thousand dollars, with a specific quill dipped in black ink. The money is going towards Rodney's college tuition, and being sent to the dean of Northernbury College. Rodney is the old jerk's son.

A couple of days later, the dean of Northernbury College receives the cheque. Feeling a bit greedy, the dean strokes a smooshed 'L' on the cheque's 'one', coincidentally with a quill identical to the old jerk's, wanting to make the 'one' a 'four' for forty thousand dollars. The next day, the dean takes the cheque to the bank to cash it, and receives ten thousand dollars.

How did the bank teller know to give the dean only ten thousand dollars, if the teller was not the old jerk?

Edited January 22, 2010 by Mixxo

[Guest]

He changed the number, but the written text would still say Ten Thousand and 00/100

[Guest]

Because the amount is also written longhand on the cheque, so it would have said "Ten thousand dollars" in addition to the "10,000".

Also, the dean would probably be arrested for fraud.

[Guest]

He changed the number, but the written text would still say Ten Thousand and 00/100

Nope. Because then the cheque would have been voided with the conflicting numbers, or at least, the dean would not have received the 10,000.00 immediately.

[Guest]

Because the amount is also written longhand on the cheque, so it would have said "Ten thousand dollars" in addition to the "10,000".

Also, the dean would probably be arrested for fraud.

Part right.

The dean WOULD have been arrested because of the conflicting values. However, that would mean he would NOT have received the 10,000.00 that he did receive in the end. He would not be able to tell if the dean deserved the 10,000.00 or the 40,000.00 ... even if one would make more logical sense in real life.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Mixxo

[Guest]

The teller is Rodney who knew how much his father, the old jerk, was sending in for his tuition.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Egghead

[Guest]

perhaps the teller was the old jerk's son

[Guest]

The teller is Rodney who knew how much his father, the old jerk, was sending in for his tuition.

Though this seems like a possible answer, no, it is incorrect, as we do not know if Rodney even knows the Dean yet, or if he even knows how much his tuition costs. Remember, the old jerk was in his house alone at the time, and in order to prove to the bank that he could not give this man (the dean) the extra 30,000.00, he would have to go through a long series of explanations, leading to the arrest of the dean, and not giving the dean, really, anything in the end.

[Guest]

The old jerk used black ink and the dean used a different color ink...

[Guest]

Maybe the dean didn't actually try to convert the 1 into a 4 itself, but rather the smooshed L is the Sterling Pound Symbol £ and tried to make the 40,000 with the help of the exchange rate, but by the time he cashed it, the rate was 1:1

Edited January 22, 2010 by jagdmc

[Guest]

Blue Ink?

[Guest]

The dean was not very smart and changed the numeral 'one' within the check's number.

The dean accidentally used ink that disappeared from the check and didn't notice the mistake before cashing it in.

The dean's quill had dried up ink on the tip and he didn't notice the lack of a mark.

[Guest]

There was a $30,000 deficit on the dean's account. When the cheque was processed for $40,000, the dean only received $10,000 back.

[Guest]

The dean was trying to help the old codger seeing how he mistakenly made the check out for 10,000 Israeli New Shekels, which has an exchange rate of 1-4. By changing the check to 40,000 and exchanging the money, he would have walked out with about 10,000 USD, which is exactly what Rodney needed for his tution. : )

[Guest]

Dean wrote on a copy of the cheque, not the acual cheque. (Or check, in America)

[Guest]

The dean's quill had dried up ink on the tip and he didn't notice the lack of a mark.

You are so very close, that I will answer it anyways. We'll say you got it.

The quill was identical to the old jerk's, however, as it turns out, the dean must not have had any ink left for the quill to be dipped in. He stroked the quill to make the four, but sadly, without any ink, it did not make a mark. So when the teller read it, it actually DID say 10,000.00. So the answer is, that the teller knew to give the dean ten thousand dollars, because the cheque was written so. The dean 'wanted' to make the 10,000 a 40,000, but 'could' not.

Edited January 23, 2010 by Mixxo

[Guest]

My first post here, a logic puzzle that I made up by myself. I checked key words, and nothing came up, so here it goes:

_________________________________________

An old jerk who lives in a house alone is writing a cheque for ten thousand dollars, with a specific quill dipped in black ink. The money is going towards Rodney's college tuition, and being sent to the dean of Northernbury College. Rodney is the old jerk's son.

A couple of days later, the dean of Northernbury College receives the cheque. Feeling a bit greedy, the dean strokes a smooshed 'L' on the cheque's 'one', coincidentally with a quill identical to the old jerk's, wanting to make the 'one' a 'four' for forty thousand dollars. The next day, the dean takes the cheque to the bank to cash it, and receives ten thousand dollars.

How did the bank teller know to give the dean only ten thousand dollars, if the teller was not the old jerk?

[Guest]

The amount was also "written" on the check

[Guest]

The amount was also "written" on the check

Yes, it was written on the check, but that cannot be used if you're saying that he did in fact change the 1 to a four, because in the end he received $10,000. If it was written Ten Thousand 00/100, but had 40,000.00 as the numeral, he would not have received the money because he would be taken away for fraud. Therefore, the 10,000 and the Ten Thousand had to match up.

Edited January 23, 2010 by Mixxo

[Guest]

I think i have the answer

He made an 'L' on the 'one' and not on '1'. So the banker probably thought it was the cheque drafter's error. Hence no charges against the dean.

Edited January 24, 2010 by Alessia

[Guest]

I think i have the answer

He made an 'L' on the 'one' and not on '1'. So the banker probably thought it was the cheque drafter's error. Hence no charges against the dean.

The answer has already been given a couple posts above yours, but this one could very well be an alternative. In this case, it would depend on whether or not the teller was lenient enough to let the mark slide.

I think the idea that the dean did not have any ink to start with is the more unflawed response though.