DCS loses case but won't pay Stefan Fischer

This video provides an update on a previous discussion about Deep Cycle Systems (DCS), an Australian battery company, and their lawsuit against a smaller YouTuber named Stefan Fischer, who runs the channel All Off-Road 4x4. Fischer had published reviews detailing issues with DCS batteries, using a multimeter to demonstrate that they did not meet advertised capacity. Instead of addressing these customer concerns, DCS sued him. The speaker initiated an investigation into DCS several years ago, uncovering several concerning facts. Independent battery tests had ranked DCS batteries as the worst among those evaluated. Furthermore, DCS had deleted all their content from archive.org. Upon finding another archive of their website, it was discovered that DCS had secretly changed their warranty policy. The website stated the last change was in June or July 2021, but archives from late 2023 showed they had downgraded the warranty to require batteries to drop to 70% capacity (from 80%) to be eligible for claims, without updating the date on the warranty page, which the speaker described as "shady and shitty." The lawsuit against Stefan Fischer has concluded, with the case being thrown out of court entirely. The speaker refers to a 40-minute video that details the findings, which he will link. Among the "fun things" discovered, the speaker highlights several points. Firstly, DCS apparently stole their logo, which is nearly identical to that of DCS Corp in America, a company that predates the Australian battery company. DCS even trademarked this copied logo. Secondly, a DCS battery reportedly exploded, damaging a customer's $100,000 vehicle. The customer was asked to send the battery back for inspection, which never occurred. When the user, receiving no remediation, left a one-star review, the owner of DCS threatened to sue them, despite not having performed the inspection or offered compensation. Thirdly, it was revealed that DCS batteries are not manufactured by the company in Australia but are purchased from a Chinese company. Evidence included original labeling on some batteries when opened and observing DCS batteries in the background of the Chinese manufacturer's YouTube video shorts. Profit and loss statements submitted during the lawsuit indicated that DCS was selling these batteries at high markups without adequate quality assurance, which the speaker believes explains their poor performance in independent tests. When confronted with the poor test results, DCS claimed they had provided a used battery to the testing group, a claim refuted by the testers who stated they purchased the batteries new, like any consumer. The most significant reason the case was thrown out relates to DCS's misrepresentation of its size. In Australia, companies filing defamation lawsuits must have 10 employees or less. DCS had publicly claimed to have offices in Belgium and a global presence, implying a much larger operation. However, in court, to qualify for the lawsuit, they had to admit they actually had fewer than 10 employees, effectively confessing to lying about their company's size to appear more impressive. The judge saw this admission of public deception as unfavorable and dismissed the case. Despite the judge ordering DCS to pay Stefan Fischer's legal fees, amounting to approximately $90,000-$100,000, DCS has not paid. This delay adds significant stress to Fischer, whose daughter has recently contracted leukemia. The speaker emphasizes the emotional and financial toll this situation is taking on Fischer, preventing him from fully focusing on his daughter's health. The speaker credits the community for helping uncover many of these details, including the alternative archive site that revealed the warranty changes. He thanks the audience for their support, noting that their contributions help protect individuals from deceptive business practices and hold companies accountable. He offers his best wishes to Stefan Fischer and his daughter and calls on the head of DCS to fulfill the court order and pay the legal fees, pointing out that DCS has sufficient assets, including a $150,000 boat, to cover the debt. The speaker concludes by challenging the head of DCS to sue him, predicting a poor outcome for the company.