People think of a bad cosmetic outcome as a clinical matter and forget that it is also a contract. It usually is, and the contractual route is often more accessible than any other, because it does not depend on the person being a statutory registrant.
Consumer law applies here
A cosmetic treatment bought privately by an individual from a business is a contract for the supply of a service to a consumer. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies. It is not displaced because the service is clinical, and it is not displaced by a consent form.
This matters most where nothing else is available. If the person who treated you is on no statutory register, no professional regulator will consider a complaint about their practice. Consumer law still applies to the contract, and it applies to companies, sole traders and individuals trading as businesses alike.
The statutory standard
Three terms are treated as included in a contract for services with a consumer.
- Reasonable care and skill. The service must be performed with reasonable care and skill. This is the central one for cosmetic treatment.
- Reasonable price. Where a price was not agreed in advance, the consumer must pay a reasonable price and no more.
- Reasonable time. Where a time was not agreed, the service must be performed within a reasonable time.
Note what reasonable care and skill is not. It is not a guarantee of a particular aesthetic result. Disappointment with an outcome that was properly explained, properly performed and within the range described is not by itself a breach. What it does cover is the service falling below the standard reasonably expected of someone doing that work.
| Provision | What it means here | What it does not mean |
|---|---|---|
| Reasonable care and skill | The service must be performed to the standard reasonably expected | A guarantee of a particular look |
| Reasonable price | Where no price was agreed, you pay no more than a reasonable one | That an agreed price can be revisited because you regret it |
| Reasonable time | Where no time was agreed, performance within a reasonable one | A right to an appointment on demand |
| Information as a term | What you were told, and relied on, can bind the trader | That a casual remark you cannot evidence will be enforced |
| Repeat performance | The trader redoes the service at its own cost | That you must accept treatment from the same person |
| Price reduction | Up to the full amount paid where repeat performance is not possible | Compensation for injury, which is a separate claim |
| Unfair terms | Unfair terms are not binding on you | That every term you dislike is unfair |
A framework written by this publication to organise the procedure. It is not a measurement, a guideline or a regulator's classification.
What was said becomes part of the contract
This provision is underused and is directly relevant to cosmetic treatment. Information given by a trader about the service, which the consumer takes into account when deciding to enter the contract or when making a decision about the service afterwards, is treated as a term of the contract.
So statements made to you about what a treatment would achieve, how long it would last, what aftercare would be provided, or who would carry it out, can be contractual rather than merely conversational.
The practical consequence is one you can act on before anything goes wrong: get material statements in writing. An email confirming what you were told converts a recollection into a document. This is the reason so much of this site says ask in writing.
- Open
- legislation.gov.uk, Consumer Rights Act 2015
legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents - Type in
- Nothing to type if you use the address above. Read Part 1 Chapter 4 on services and Part 2 on unfair terms.
- A good result looks like
- The statutory text in front of you, so that you can quote the section rather than paraphrase a summary, and see for yourself what the remedies are and in what order.
- An ambiguous result looks like
- Guidance pages that describe consumer rights without citing the Act. Clinic terms that state a position inconsistent with the statute and cite nothing.
- What it does not prove
- That your particular complaint succeeds. The Act sets the standard and the remedies. Whether the standard was met in your case depends on the facts and on evidence.
- Note
- Citizens Advice publishes practical guidance alongside the statute, which is useful for the procedural steps.
The remedies, and their order
Where a service breaches the reasonable care and skill term, the Act provides for repeat performance, meaning the trader performs the service again at its own cost, and, where that is impossible or not done within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience, a price reduction, which can be up to the full amount paid.
Repeat performance sits awkwardly in cosmetic treatment. You may have no wish for the same person to treat you again, and it may be clinically inappropriate. Where repeat performance is impossible, a price reduction becomes the route.
These statutory remedies are separate from a claim for personal injury, which is a different and more substantial matter for which you should take legal advice. This site does not give legal advice, and where injury is involved you should get some.
Unfair terms
The Act also deals with unfair terms in consumer contracts. A term which, contrary to the requirement of good faith, causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer, is not binding on the consumer.
There is also a specific and important limit: a term cannot exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence. A clause purporting to do so does not have that effect.
Terms worth examining in cosmetic contracts include non refundable deposits out of proportion to any actual loss, clauses purporting to prevent you from leaving a review or complaining, clauses requiring all disputes to be resolved through the clinic's own process, and clauses expiring prepaid courses of treatment. None is automatically unfair, and none is automatically enforceable either.
What to do, in order
- Write to the trader setting out what happened, what you say fell short, and what you want, keeping it factual and dated.
- Name the remedy you are seeking, in the language of the Act: repeat performance, or a price reduction.
- Give a reasonable deadline for a reply, in writing.
- If you paid by card, tell your card issuer at the same time and ask what routes are open to you.
- If unresolved, consider trading standards through the consumer advice service, and the small claims route.
- Keep every document, and add each reply to the file.
Paying by card, which changes your position
How you pay affects what you can do. Where a purchase is made using credit and falls within the relevant statutory conditions, the card issuer can be jointly liable with the supplier, which gives you a claim against a large regulated institution rather than only against a small business. Debit card purchases may be addressed through chargeback, which is a scheme rule rather than a statutory right.
The thresholds and conditions matter and are set out in the finance article. The practical point at the moment of paying is simply that the payment method is a decision with consequences, and it is worth thinking about for one minute before handing over a card.
If it goes further
Most matters resolve through correspondence. If not, the small claims route exists, through the county court in England and Wales, the simple procedure in the sheriff court in Scotland, and the equivalent process in Northern Ireland. It is designed to be usable without a solicitor, and Citizens Advice publishes guidance on how it works.
What makes a claim workable is the same file this site has been describing throughout: the identity of the trader, the quotation, what was said in writing, the consent documents, the records and the photographs. Which body does what, if you would rather complain than claim, is set out in who you complain to.