Consumers who have suffered "horrific" injuries including permanent facial disfigurement, scarring and burns as a result of botched cosmetic treatment are being left with no hope of compensation due to an "explosion" in uninsured practitioners, a leading lawyer has said.
Jennifer Wallace, a partner at Thompsons Solicitors who has specialised for more than a decade in personal injury claims involving the hair and beauty industry, said her caseload has soared from a couple of claims in 2012 to roughly 200 enquiries a year.
Clients are "shocked" to discover they often have no prospect of damages despite clear evidence of serious harm and negligence, she added.
READ MORE:
- SPECIAL REPORT: 'Someone is going to die': Regulation gone wrong?
- SPECIAL REPORT: Why Scotland's newest private hospital is for cosmetic surgery
- I tried Scotland's newest skin-tightening procedure - so what's it like?
Ms Wallace said: "It's really upsetting to say to people 'I know you have a case here, I know there is liability, and I know you've been left with a horrific injury, but unfortunately I can't do anything about it because there is no way I can get money out of this person'.
"I've had somebody in a fillers case where they had injected into a nerve and the client had been left with a Bell's palsy-type injury - there was permanent deformity of the face and they were hospitalised.
"The practitioner was a beauty therapist who had put on her website that she was insured when she wasn't.
"I also had a lady with horrific injuries from a fibroblast facial [a plasma energy-based laser used to tighten skin].
"She had permanent scarring that no amount of make up could camouflage but in that case the clinic was flouting the terms and conditions of its insurance.
"She most definitely had post-traumatic stress from that treatment, but there was nothing I could do."
In Scotland, independent clinics run by healthcare practitioners such as doctors, dentists and nurses are regulated by Healthcare Improvement Scotland.
But there is nothing legally to stop non-healthcare professionals providing cosmetic treatments including Botox, filler injections, and laser treatments in premises such as beauty salons, hairdressers, or in their own homes without any regulation and potentially little training.
Ms Wallace said that she had handled one case where a practitioner fled to the country to avoid paying out in a claim where a 21-year-old had gone bald as a result of burns to her scalp after bleach was left on her hair too long, and another where a woman was hospitalised after teeth whitening went wrong.
She said: "It's a criminal offence for anyone other than a dentist to perform teeth whitening, but there was a spell of cases where people were being prosecuted for doing teeth whitening in places like beauty salons.
"I had a lady who went to a woman's house, which is obviously not a very sterile environment, and she used a product that had 30% bleach in it.
"The regulation limit is something like 6%. This woman went into an allergic reaction and was hospitalised on an IV drip for a week.
"The hospital was phoning her asking 'what have you given this patient because we need to treat her', and she was very standoffish, very defensive."
The Herald has also heard of cases where patients have been harmed but are too scared to speak out - even anonymously - after being threatened by rogue operators.
"I've had a couple of cases where the practitioner has associations with crime and the client is frightened to step forward and say anything," said Ms Wallace.
In most cases, however, victims are simply "mortified" - or dismissed.
She said: "It is an absolute struggle with people who are not regulated because they often don't engage.
"They won't have insurance and they will just ignore correspondence.
"People feel embarrassed. In my experience of dealing with clients who go to the NHS, they often feel like there's an attitude of 'you brought this on yourself'."
Claire said she wants to make other people aware of the dangers.
The 49-year-old was left with a severe rash covering her face and chest after undergoing a microneedling procedure at a clinic in Aberdeenshire.
The non-surgical cosmetic treatment uses a cluster of 36 tiny needles to puncture the skin in order to stimulate the production of collagen and elastin, helping to reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles.
Claire was alarmed when she began experiencing pain during the procedure and asked the practitioner to stop, but they carried on.
Swollen and scarlet marks remained visible on her skin one month later and a year on she is still paying for private treatment at another clinic to heal the damage.
She said: “I went for this treatment thinking it would improve my skin. Instead, I have been left covered with marks that I can still see today.
"I am self-conscious about these marks on my face and chest.
"They are an ongoing reminder of what that practitioner, who I trusted to perform the procedure safely, did to me.”
Ms Wallace said that when she first began handling cosmetic-related cases a decade ago, roughly 70% involved non-healthcare practitioners and 30% healthcare professionals.
Today, she said the balance is "more like 60-40" due to a growing awareness that claims against regulated clinics - which carry insurance - are much more likely to be successful.
READ MORE:
- Botox Explained: How does it work, where did it come from, what are the risks?
- Explained: What's the story with Brazilian Butt Lifts?
- What's it like to have one of Glasgow's most sought-after facials?
Nonetheless, she said even winning these claims can be "an uphill struggle" as the vast majority of doctors, dentists, and other healthcare professionals deny liability.
In her most successful case to date, Ms Wallace secured £85,000 in damages for a woman who developed a vascular occlusion - a blocked blood vessel - following lip filler injections carried out by an aesthetic nurse.
Multiple injections of Hylase - a filler dissolving agent - failed to reverse the onset of necrosis and NHS surgeons feared the woman's lip would have to be removed.
It was saved only when she underwent oxygen therapy at a private clinic, but she was unable to return to work for a year due to significant psychological trauma.
Ms Wallace said: "That was a really horrific case. She had just lost her Mum, she had gone for lip fillers to make herself feel better.
"It was a 40th gift from her sister, and it was just devastating.
"The original offer from the defenders was 'go away, we don't accept any blame' - standard. Then they offered £5000.
"Then we settled for 17 times that amount.
"In that case it was a nurse practitioner who had been on the relevant courses, so sometimes things just go wrong.
"The good thing about that case was that, while liability was denied throughout, we knew there was insurance in place and we were able to secure the client compensation that really reflected the distress she had suffered."
With the popularity of non-surgical cosmetic procedures soaring in Scotland, Ms Wallace urges consumers to use "qualified, experienced, insured" practitioners and warned that some clinics are falsely claiming to be regulated by HIS.
The watchdog's website has a search function where the public can double check whether clinics are registered.
Ms Wallace added: "The non-surgical is much easier and more affordable than plastic surgery.
"They can sell it as 'get a non-surgical facelift on your lunch hour', and it'll only cost you £400-500 with much less downtime.
"It's exploded because of the availability, the affordability, but also Instagram culture.
"And there is still the misconception among consumers that they are going to be protected in some way by the law.
"It's a really a hard pill to swallow for people when I say 'no, you went to see a beauty therapist for this filler'.
"You can buy filler on the internet. You can get laser equipment and pay it up.
"A clinic can look good, but it can still be cutting corners when it comes to insurance, training and the basics."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here