I just finally got through reading the entirety of the thread. What an interesting read.
If "Parrots" lab test are as conclusive as we are lead to believe, I wonder if I'll ever buy another expensive cable again. While there is no real evidence of any intent to defraud, there certainly is ample evidence of negligence/incompetence by the MOTs. While defects and mistakes do happen, here the MOTs in question gave no evidence of any kind of quality control provisions in this thread that would have prevented something like this from happening.
How can someone make claims about the cables they sell if they don't even bother to test them before they ship them out the door? "Trusting your manufacturer" and passing along the burden of quality control checks to your customers might not be such a winning business model. I can't imagine any business surviving long without taking the time and effort to verify the basic claims they made about their products.
While I can understand how dealing with someone like "Parrots" can get annoying, I also find it easy to understand "Parrots" frustration at the way he has been treated. The MOTs communications with him read to me at times as well meaning, but at other times as an attempted brush-off. Whether that was the intent or not is not for me to say, I can only comment on how it reads to a disinterested party.
I can imagine that things might have worked out quite differently if "Parrots" initial complaints had been taken a little more seriously and if he had been treated with a little more respect throughout the process. A polite apology and an offer to replace his cable or refund his money might have satisfied him. Instead, we end up with an MOT questioning his ability to understand English. Very disappointing.
Edited by TMoney - 5/31/11 at 4:09pm