Probably depends on the bank and their internal rules, but by Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), no. This stackexchange is relevant but not exact. Enough to show the point though.
blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Would this actually work?
Never considered how illiterate people use cheques
blueworld@piefed.world 1 month ago
tiramichu@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
This particular cheque should work, if processed by a person.
Cheques have two fields for the amount; numbers and written out. The numerical field is the most important and required part, while the written is to deter fraud, for example the bearer may attempt to alter £100 to £1000, or £300 to £800, and having the sum in writing makes this a lot harder.
So as long as this cheque has $650 in the number field, it should be valid.
VitoRobles@lemmy.today 1 month ago
I also assumed the number field was all that was needed.
I had fraudulent checks used under my name. And it was only caught because the thief signed my name “perfectly”. Where I purposely sign with extra scribbles.
After that experience, every check I wrote, I added something extra in the memo section only I would know. I could see someone being extra paranoid and using the “written” section as another test - like purposely misspelling words.