Connect with us

Comments

CASE: 89 complaints lodged against Parklane Mall salon in 2 years

CASE alerts the public to a beauty salon in Parklane Shopping Mall due to two years of complaints citing poor services and appointment issues. In 2022-2023, 89 grievances were registered against the establishment.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: The Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) cautioned the public about a beauty salon in Parklane Shopping Mall, following two years of complaints against the shop’s alleged poor quality of services and difficulty in securing appointments.

In 2022 and 2023, the salon received 89 grievances, primarily from customers who purchased nail or eyelash service packages ranging from S$120 to S$1,200, said the consumer watchdog on Wednesday (24 January).

Customers faced challenges in booking appointments, citing the salon’s unresponsiveness and extended response times.

Even upon securing a booking, patrons experienced prolonged waiting times. Complaints extended to the poor quality of lash extensions, resulting in issues like premature falling off, discomfort, swelling, and itchiness.

While the salon offered refunds to dissatisfied customers, CASE reported that the agreements were not honoured.

Following multiple complaints, CASE urged the salon to sign a Voluntary Compliance Agreement to cease unfair practices and compensate affected customers. However, the salon did not comply.

In response, CASE is involving the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore for further action.

CASE President Melvin Yong advises consumers to research and read reviews about beauty salons before making purchases.

Consumers are warned against discounts, trials, or one-time offers and encouraged to leave sessions if uncomfortable.

CASE recommends patronizing CaseTrust-accredited salons, ensuring no sales pitches during treatments. These accredited salons provide a five-day cooling-off period for refunds on unutilized services.

Customers with disputes against Diva Lash & Nails can contact CASE for assistance at 6277-5100 or visit the CASE website.

Numerous complaints since 2020

Certainly, this isn’t the first time the shop’s name has appeared in local media outlets.

Back in 2020, there were reports of numerous patrons claiming they experienced eye pain after getting eyelash extensions at the shop.

One customer, for example, shared her ordeal, alleging the use of masking tape and super glue in fake eyelash extensions. Screenshots of messages from other dissatisfied customers accompanied her Facebook post.

Checking Reddit comments, some individuals revealed visiting the same shop in 2019 and expressed surprise that it’s still in operation.

Describing the shop’s reputation as “smelly,” one comment suggested searching for past cases on Facebook posts or Google.

Disgruntled customers expose troubling trends on Google Reviews

Examining the shop’s Google rating reveals a mere one-star rating, coupled with negative reviews cautioning others against visiting.

For instance, a review posted a year ago, alleged that she was pressured into purchasing a $350 package, which included 10 sessions with unlimited 2-month touch-ups after each session. The customer agreed to pay $250 upfront and an additional $100 at each subsequent session.

Despite requesting a photo of the receipt and package details, the staff allegedly failed to provide any information. When issues arose with lash extensions, attempts to contact the salon via Instagram and WhatsApp went unanswered.

In another case from January 2022, a customer alleged the shop owner pitched a $350 package, offering 10 shareable sessions valid for five years.

Within 19 hours post-appointment, the customer noticed the entire middle section of their left eye’s eyelashes had fallen out. Communication attempts via Instagram resulted in a suggestion for an impractical in-person touch-up, prompting scepticism about the need for daily touch-ups.

“To have paid $88(lash by lash eyelash extension) and $350 (eyelash extension package) but receive such quality of eyelash extensions and irresponsible after-sales service,” the comment wrote.

Given the persistent complaints from the public, it is peculiar that CASE has only recently taken action by involving the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore to consider further measures against the company.

Although CASE extended an invitation to the salon to sign a Voluntary Compliance Agreement, it appears that this initiative has not effectively curtailed the shop’s ongoing unfair practices.

CASE received more than 1,400 complaints against businesses in beauty industry in 2022

CASE President Melvin Yong confirmed in a statement in May last year that in 2022, CASE received more than 1,400 complaints against businesses in the beauty industry, where one in four complaints related to misleading and false claims and pressure sales tactics.

Mr Yong also hoped that the CCCS’ enforcement actions against Salon One end a strong signal to the industry that businesses will deter businesses from engaging in unfair practices that are detrimental to consumer interests.

To address the persistent problem of unfair practices in the beauty industry, He calls on the government to mandate a cooling-off period for the industry.

Share this post via:
Continue Reading
8 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
8 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Is this the Greatest Joke CASE put out to appease sheeps? They had just proudly announced they DO NOT have ANY TEETH BUT YET they do EAT Govt Funding (Govt funding is people’s money, NOT PAP, but PAP can dispense as they select).

I truly miss LKY. Not that I am a fan but he ran an excellent civil service. I am told that it would take only 3 days for civil servants to address complaints and revert back to the complainant on the actions taken. Today some govt. agencies take five working days and others seven working days and that is to reply you not with information of the action that had been taken. CCS is not suited to be head of the civil service.We need an iron fisted person to get the civil in working order to work in the interest… Read more »

So many complaints and the licence was not terminated. No action until made public.

“Given the persistent complaints from the public, it is peculiar that CASE has only recently taken action by involving theCompetition and Consumer Commission of Singapore to consider further measures against the company”

Comment:

In my view, CASE is a useless organisation.

The salon was basically giving the middle finger to CASE knowing that CASE is truly toothless and useless.

If I were Melvin Yong, I would hang my head in shame.

Trending

Discover more from Gutzy Asia

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue Reading