Beauty
Case studies

£13,060

Claimant suffered scarring following semi-permanent tattoos being wrongly applied

I represented the Claimant who attended beauticians for semi-permanent tattoos to be applied to her eyebrows. She was not offered any consultation prior to the treatment and was not made aware of any risks of the treatment. The tattoos were applied incorrectly, above the natural brow line and in a colour which did not match the Claimant’s skin tone. It transpired when the Claimant complained about the treatment that the Defendant was not fully qualified to be carrying out the procedure.

The Defendant failed to admit liability throughout alleging that the treatment was not carried out negligently and alleging that the Claimant had drunk alcohol in the 24 hours prior to the procedure and this impacted the outcome. Liability and quantum remained in dispute, therefore the matter proceeded to a trial in which the claimant was successful.

The Claimant suffered physical injuries and medical evidence was used to confirm that the eyebrows had been tattooed incorrectly.

The claim settled for £13,060.24 and consisted of compensation for injuries sustained and for future make-up, camouflage creams, laser treatment and travel expenses.

– Suzanne Mason

Beauty

£12,438

Claimant suffered a reaction to eyelash extensions

I represented the Claimant who attended beauticians to have her eyelashes tinted. She was not offered any consultation prior to the treatment, she was not made aware of any risks of the treatment or given a patch test prior to the treatment being carried out. She suffered an allergic reaction to the procedure, suffered severe swelling to her eyes, which over the days following the procedure, worsened. The Claimant had to attend the emergency eye hospital.

The Defendant failed to admit liability throughout alleging that the treatment was not carried out negligently. Proceedings were issued and the claim was settled by way of the claimant’s acceptance of a Part 36 offer.

The Claimant suffered physical injuries and medical evidence was used to confirm that she had clearly suffered a reaction as a result of the procedure being carried out negligently.

The claim settled for £12,436.90 and consisted of compensation for injuries and loss of earnings.

– Suzanne Mason