B.C.’s Civil Resolution Tribunal has rejected the case of a woman who claimed $5,000 in damages after she said her hair bleaching went horribly wrong.
Banafsheh Fahimi claimed Khaled Rahime "over-bleached" her hair, causing damage. She claimed $5,000 for the amount she allegedly paid Rahime for hair services, plus damages for repair treatments and products.
Rahime denied damaging Fahimi’s hair, and claimed Fahimi was trying to “scam the beauty system.”
In her Oct. 31 decision, tribunal member Leah Volkers said Fahimi had a Nov. 22, 2022 appointment with Rahime to bleach her hair blond.
However, she was dissatisfied with the colour result after the first appointment and requested another to fix it. So, on Dec. 16, she had a second appointment.
Volkers said Fahimi asked Rahime to make sure her hair would not be damaged since she had to bleach it again, and was assured it would not be.
However, Fahimi said after the second appointment she noticed that her hair had been severely damaged and over-processed.
“She said it was excessively soft and mushy and would easily break and fall off,” Volkers said.
Rahime told the tribunal Fahimi received over $1,000 in hair services for only $300, and that he offered the second appointment free to assist Fahimi with her dissatisfaction.
He said Fahimi’s hair was not damaged after the second appointment, but she refused to leave and demanded a refund.
The tribunal member said Fahimi must show Rahime owed her a duty of care, that he breached the standard of care, she sustained damage, and the damage was caused by his breach.
Volkers found Fahimi’s before-and-after photos did not show Fahimi’s hair was obviously damaged after the hair services.
Volkers also said a statement from a former romantic partner about the state of her hair did not prove a breach.
“She also provided no expert evidence to support her allegation that Mr. Rahime over-processed or over-bleached her hair,” Volkers said.
The tribunal member found Fahimi did not meet her burden of proving that Rahim’s hair services were negligent and dismissed the claim.
