Mumbai Consumer Court Orders Refund and Compensation for Laser Hair Removal Treatment Gone Wrong

Keywords ; Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Central Mumbai, laser hair removal, unfair trade practices, refund, compensation, medical negligence, consumer rights

Mumbai Consumer Court Orders Refund and Compensation in Laser Hair Removal Complaint

The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Central Mumbai recently ruled in favor of a complainant who had alleged deficiencies and unfair trade practices by a clinic offering laser hair removal services. The clinic was ordered to refund the full advance payment made for the treatment and to compensate the complainant for physical and mental suffering due to improper medical procedures and lack of adequate supervision.

Case Background

The complaint involved a woman who booked a package of seven laser hair removal sessions with the clinic on February 25, 2023, paying an advance of Rs. 47,200. During the first session, the complainant experienced a burning sensation on her skin, but no attending doctor was present. The technician applied moisturising cream and assured the complainant that her skin would recover. However, the situation worsened, leading the complainant to seek assistance from a private dermatologist on February 26, 2023. Despite requesting a refund, the clinic refused and instead offered a credit note for future services, which was not acceptable to the complainant.

The complainant filed her grievance through the National Consumer Helpline on March 20, 2023, and later approached the Consumer Court seeking a full refund and compensation for her distress.

Complaint Details and Allegations

The complainant claimed that the clinic’s refusal to issue a refund and its handling of the situation amounted to an unfair trade practice. She argued that the clinic had failed to follow proper medical protocols and operated without a qualified doctor overseeing the treatment, leading to her skin burns. The complainant also noted that the clinic had not informed her of potential side effects, which further contributed to her distress. Additionally, she pointed out that the clinic was not registered under the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010, which further raised concerns about its legitimacy.

The clinic, on the other hand, denied any negligence, explaining that side effects like hyperpigmentation are common with laser treatments and typically subside in a few days. They asserted that the complainant had consented to the treatment and that the non-refundable policy was clearly mentioned in the invoice. The clinic claimed they had offered a credit note as a goodwill gesture, which the complainant rejected.

Court’s Ruling

The Commission found that the clinic’s handling of the procedure violated consumer rights. It confirmed that the laser treatment was conducted without the supervision of a qualified medical professional, which is a breach of health regulations. The court also noted that while the invoice contained a non-refundable policy, it failed to warn the complainant about possible adverse effects from the treatment.

The Commission ruled that the clinic’s insistence on issuing a credit note, instead of refunding the amount, amounted to an unfair trade practice, as it imposed an unjust policy on consumers. The court held that a non-refundable policy cannot override the consumer’s right to a fair and reasonable solution, particularly in cases involving negligence or medical issues.

Orders and Compensation

The court partially allowed the complaint, directing the clinic to refund the full advance of Rs. 47,200, along with 9% interest from February 25, 2023, until the full payment is made. The clinic was also ordered to pay Rs. 30,000 as compensation for the physical and mental suffering caused to the complainant and an additional Rs. 10,000 to cover litigation costs. The clinic was given 45 days to comply with the order.

Significance

This ruling highlights the importance of consumer rights and the responsibility of service providers, especially in the healthcare and beauty industries, to ensure proper medical procedures are followed and informed consent is obtained. It also emphasizes that businesses cannot use one-sided, non-refundable policies to deny consumers justice when negligence or unfair treatment is involved.

The case sets a precedent for consumer protection in the beauty and wellness sector, ensuring that clients receive proper medical supervision and are informed of any risks associated with treatments.

Stay tuned for live updates on the rupee’s movement and real-time business news on Kanishk Social Media—your go-to source for comprehensive stock market and legal news.