Could one sue a barber/hairdresser for doing a bad job?

BetterThanThou

I'd like to start off this thread by saying I have no intentions to sue a barber/hairdresser for doing a bad job as I feel that would be a huge amount of hassle for something that has barely any effect on me.
But anyway, a few days ago I went to a barber and got my hair cut, the barber absolutely ignored practically all that I said, cutting my hair to about an inch and a half long despite me asking for them to trim it to about 4 inches. But anyway, it got me thinking, could I sue the barber if I wanted to? like I said, I have no intentions of doing this, as it hardly affected me, but if I was someone with much longer hair which would take much longer to grow back and it did considerably affect me, would I have a case in suing the barber?

Peregrinus

You'd be suing in negligence, basically saying that a competent barber would not have done what he did. It would be up to you to show that he was negligent; it's not enough that you're unhappy with the haircut. And of course your evidence about what you had asked for would quite likely be contradicted by his evidence.

Even if you could show he was negligent, in the absence of some fairly unusual facts I don't see you recovering colossal damages. I can't see annoyance over a haircut which was not the one you hoped for being worth a huge sum. Be a different matter if he had injured your scalp with the negligent use of chemicals, or something of the kind.

billy few mates

As the old saying goes "the difference between a bad haircut and a good haircut is three days...!"

234

Peregrinus wrote: »

You'd be suing in negligence, basically saying that a competent barber would not have done what he did. It would be up to you to show that he was negligent; it's not enough that you're unhappy with the haircut. And of course your evidence about what you had asked for would quite likely be contradicted by his evidence.

Even if you could show he was negligent, in the absence of some fairly unusual facts I don't see you recovering colossal damages. I can't see annoyance over a haircut which was not the one you hoped for being worth a huge sum. Be a different matter if he had injured your scalp with the negligent use of chemicals, or something of the kind.

I would have thought that the first port of call would be breach of contract, probably slightly easier to show than negligence. However, the measure of damages would be a bit of a joke.

ScaliaJ

Seems like some enterprising lawyers have already led the way in this niche area! - http://www.hairlawyers.com

Steve

OP, you've asked two very distinct questions there:

BetterThanThou wrote: »

could I sue the barber if I wanted to?

Yes you can, you can in effect sue anybody for anything that you can imagine (with a few exceptions).

would I have a case in suing the barber?

That's the clincher - in theory you could take it all the way to the high court and spend half a million euros to win the case and be awarded your €50 haircut fee back. 'Having a case' is not always the issue.

In reality, this is something the small claims court would deal with.

Bepolite

Steve wrote: »

That's the clincher - in theory you could take it all the way to the high court and spend half a million euros to win the case and be awarded your €50 haircut fee back. 'Having a case' is not always the issue.

In reality, this is something the small claims court would deal with.

I'm not sure you can, potential damages would place this squarely in the district court with an appeal to the circuit court. I'm open to correction, but I don;t think you can go to the High Court where damages would be very low.

Steve

I won't pretend to know more than I do there so not going to argue with that.

BetterThanThou

What if there was some legitimate emotional damages? For some people their hair is extremely important and a bad haircut could ruin their self image and cause them to have low self esteem. If something like this were to happen, could someone sue on the grounds of emotional damages?

Peregrinus

BetterThanThou wrote: »

What if there was some legitimate emotional damages? For some people their hair is extremely important and a bad haircut could ruin their self image and cause them to have low self esteem. If something like this were to happen, could someone sue on the grounds of emotional damages?

Emotional distress is something you can include in your claim for damages. Simply being emotionally distressed does not, in itself, entitle you to damages; you still have to prove that the hairdresser was negligent or in some other way in breach of duty. Once you show that you are entitled to damages, and at that point any emotional distress you might have suffered would be taken into account in setting the level of damages.

"Low self-esteem" is a bit vague; I can't see a court being too impressed with that. But if, say, you were getting the haircut for a big occasion, and you were so embarrassed by the state of your hair that the occasion was ruined for you, that's the kind of thing that might add a few euro to the award of damages.

Bepolite

Steve wrote: »

I won't pretend to know more than I do there so not going to argue with that.

Apologies I wasn't trying to be smart, you're point is a valid one ref costs of course.

Valentine1

I would think that Breach of Contract is the most appropriate Head to sue under. In order to bring an action in Negligence you would have to show that The Barber or Hairdresser was under a duty of care to make your hair look good and I don't think such a duty exists.

Under breach of contract however it could be argued that it was an implied term of the contract that the Barber would follow your instructions, something he failed to do and as a result is in breach.

Of course the damages suffered by a bad haircut are in the normal course of things, so minor that no Court would consider them and thus any action would be dismissed on the de minimus principle.

It could also be argued that the Tort of Negligent infliction of Emotional Distress might also be a possibility if the circumstances were correct. For example where a Bride (or indeed Groom)has her hair done on her wedding day and the Hairdresser does such an appalling job that the Bride or Groom is so embarrassed as to be emotionally distressed then the Tort would apply.

Steve

Not the same of course, but on a similar vein.
This made it to the High Court:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/finger-case-is-compensation-culture-gone-mad-says-judge-29843585.html

A CLAIM for damages over an injury caused to a two-year-old girl when a finger got trapped in the metal lid of a sugar dispenser has been described as "another case of compensation culture gone mad".

Thankfully, the Judge had the sense to dismiss it, but it still got there.