Jyoti telephoned me extremely distressed after attending a hairdressing salon where she had requested a Brazilian keratin treatment which was supposed to leave her hair straight and glossy.
Unbeknown to Jyoti the salon actually carried out a procedure called the L’oreal X-Tenso which is a chemical straightening procedure. Jyoti realised things were not quite right when, after the application of the product, her normally dark brown hair began to fade dramatically. She called over the hairdresser who immediately removed the product from her hair.
Despite a neutralising product being applied, it was clear to Jyoti that something had gone wrong. When her hair was being dried by the hairdresser Jyoti was shocked to see that her hair had become faded, frazzled and dried out almost like a doll’s hair. Her hair began to break and fall out.
What we did:
I immediately arranged for Jyoti to be seen by a hair specialist who concluded that a chemical hair straightening procedure had been used. This was not what Jyoti had asked for and had resulted in her hair shafts being seriously damaged as well as causing significant scalp burns. Our expert concluded that Jyoti had been exposed to less than adequate standards of care and confirmed that my client’s hair would take approximately 34 months to grow out to the stage it was at prior to this treatment.
The salon refused to accept responsibility for the damage caused to Jyoti’s hair, even when served with our expert evidence. As a result I had no option but to issue county court proceedings against the salon which they chose to defend. Fortunately, very shortly before trial, the salon had a change of heart and decided to settle my client’s claim. My client was overjoyed to accept a substantial sum in settlement of her damages.
Again what assisted Jyoti in this case was the fact that she wisely took photographs of her hair immediately following the treatment.
This proved extremely useful, in this case in particular, because Jyoti tried to remedy the damage done to her hair by approaching an alternative salon shortly after this disastrous treatment to try to remedy the damage done. The defendants tried to argue that it was the second treatment which had led to Jyoti’s damaged hair. Luckily as we had photographs taken before the application of the further dye treatment our expert was able to conclude persuasively that the second treatment had no bearing upon the damage and that the damage was clearly evidenced in the photographs taken by our client immediately after the L’oreal X-tenso treatment. It is important that all clients be aware of the importance of obtaining good evidence of the damage caused to their hair by these treatments. As I always tell my clients it is not about the truth it about the proof. I would therefore urge all my clients to ensure good photographs are taken and sent to me as quickly as possible.