A SALON owner who challenged a verdict against her for damaging two women’s hair managed to get the RM630 award reversed.
Nurul Haryani says the claimant did not take up her offer to repair the hair damage.
The claimant, Nor Salasiahtun Hanija Ahmad, had been awarded the sum following a hearing at the Johor Baru Consumer Claims Tribunal in early January this year.
Salon owner Nurul Haryani Nordini told tribunal president Lee Chee Thim that she had been unable to attend the hearing as she was in Indonesia, attending a beauty exhibition.
Nor Salasiahtun and her niece, Mizan Adila Norhan, had gone to the beauty salon in Taman Bukit Jaya in Ulu Tiram, Johor Baru, last Nov 4.
“We went there to have our hair rebonded and coloured,” Nor Salasiahtun said during the hearing.
Hair rebonding is a process that takes several hours and uses powerful chemicals to straighten hair.
Nor Salasiahtun and Mizan were charged RM400 and RM230 respectively based on the length and thickness of their hair.
The claimant said the respondent Nurul Haryani was in the salon during their visit, and had advised them not to wash their hair for the next three days.
“On the fourth day, after washing, our hair became frizzy, dried out and bristly with split ends,” said Nor Salasiahtun.
The claimant said she had sent a message to the salon owner on Nov 13, to inform her of their hair issues and asked for an apology but was refused.
She further said that Nurul Haryani had blamed the hair issue on the two salon employees who attended to them.
However, the respondent told the tribunal she had asked the duo to come back to the salon to have their hair repaired on Nov 19.
“I was willing to repair their damaged hair at no cost, but they never turned up,” she said.
The respondent told the tribunal she decided to challenge the RM630 award that had been given to the claimant at an earlier hearing.
After hearing from the respondent, Lee dismissed Nor Salasiahtun’s claim since she had not taken up the respondent’s offer to repair the damage.
Sasha: The seller did not respond to requests for a refund for the swimsuit.
In a separate case, Lee ordered a seller from Penang who did not attend the hearing to refund RM110 to claimant Sasha Affilia Sabri, 32, within two weeks.
“After hearing from you, it sounds like you have most probably been conned by a scammer. Next time, please be careful when dealing with unknown persons online claiming to have goods for sale,” said Lim to Sasha.
The 32-year-old clerk said she paid RM60 for a swimsuit for her eight-year-old daughter and RM50 for a scarf for herself.
The claimant made the payment on Feb 24 after seeing advertisements of women’s apparel via an instant messaging service.
“I transferred RM110 for the swimsuit and scarf to the seller’s bank account and a few minutes later, the seller responded that the swimsuit was out of stock,” said Sasha.
The claimant said she had asked the seller to refund RM60 but the latter did not respond and left the chat group.
The tribunal can be reached at 07-2271755/1766.
