These number errors are one I do not like. I know Y2K was a thing, but that was because of a limitation in how computers store numbers and how the memory is assigned.
These readers should not be set up in the same way and not have the same limitation. It would be more realistic for the reader to give an error and/or overload then to give an incorrect result missing information. Plus if a 13 year old can get their total level over 300 then it should be possible for people to raise their total levels much higher since they should be expected to train and raise their levels their entire lives. Or do they just assume no one ever gets stronger.
Also have to love the hypocrisy of saying that the orders need to be in balance when they are clearly creating a huge imbalance in them.
Blind faith in a tool that you should not have blind faith in (nothing is perfect so there is always a chance for an error to occur) combined with ignoring what 3 discrepancies from the rest (he placed first in the exam so should not be that weak, there was a leading 0 which is indicated was not there since the tested uttered the 0 for the MC but not the 67, and the tool flashed for the MC but no one else) makes me think that the instructors are not that bright, and likely bigoted jerks (since the issues were with a commoner not a noble).
@Nep : It would have to be the total summation of his individual skill levels, remembers 5 200's would total to 1000 and we did not see the full list of his skills, only a portion. In fact 3 of the 4 skill listed on page 1 are not there when we see the current skill levels on page 9 so there has to be more skills then listed.