A woman who claims her hair was cut into an unwanted "mullet" and destroyed by a hairdresser is demanding £16,000 in damages.
Jessica Bray wanted compensation from the hair salon, claiming she had suffered emotionally and she was forced to buy a £1,000 wig for her 30th birthday.
She claims staff at Saint James Hair Studio damaged her hair when it was bleached at the salon in April last year, and she had to see a psychologist for humiliation and distress.
Her hair was left so brittle, she claims, that it broke off, and she went back to get it repaired but she ended up looking like she had a "mullet".
The case went to a tribunal, where Ms Bray, from Melbourne, Australia, lost her claim for damages worth AUD $30,000 (£16,000).
Schoolgirl's heartbreaking message for mum who abandoned her as a newborn
Ms Bray told News.com.au: “I was told to shave my head because of the damage."
The salon denied claims that it had breached consumer law.
Ms Bray claims a hairdresser at the salon had cut her hair wrong once before, but she returned because she assumed it wouldn't happen again.
Woman paralysed at 24 'suffered stroke after taking the pill'
She said: "I returned and they did it again, and dropped dye on my clothes and also under-bleached my hair again meaning I would have to have my hair bleached four times in around six weeks.”
Ms Bray claims she returned to the salon to get her haircut fixed.
She said a "random" hairdresser was assigned to her but she was left in the chair for a long time with her hair partially cut.
She added: “I tug on it gently and it falls out in my hand. The owner sees, stops cutting a man’s hair and runs out back to my hairdresser.”
Ms Bray claims her hair fell out in clumps in the following days, and she complained to the salon's owner.
Ms Bray claims he offered to compensate her but gave her a refund instead.
The salon claims Ms Bray's hair was in poor condition because she had been bleaching it blonde for years.
Ms Bray, an unemployed retail sales worker, said her hair looked so bad that she didn't apply for jobs because she thought she would be rejected based on her appearance.
The case was recently resolved in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
Owner James Young, who denied the claims, told the Sydney Morning Herald: “Hairdressing is like art, it’s subjective. I think it’s good but the client might not like it."
Tribunal member Danica Buljan found Ms Bray's claim to be “excessive and without justification”, it was reported.
Ms Buljan ruled the customer was entitled to a $270 refund and $114 compensation for a psychologist appointment she attended for humiliation and distress.
She ruled the salon breached consumer law by failing to provide services with due care and skill, as the damage to Ms Bray’s hair was “reasonably foreseeable”.
Ms Bray is considering an appeal.
