ZARROW Aesthetics has issued an apology after a delicate medical procedure went horribly wrong.
It triggered a social media war.
A client requested a chin laser treatment, which went badly wrong due, to the use of a laser frequency unsuitable for her skin type in August.
The client demanded US$10 000 in compensation for the damage caused.
Zarrow Aesthetics founder, Farai Beaular Munemo, acknowledged they were at fault and offered to cover the costs of consulting a dermatologist.
However, the client opted for a public campaign against the company.
Munemo reiterated the company’s commitment to finding an amicable solution and offering the best service possible to clients.
“It’s unfortunate that, in the quest to deliver the best and satisfy our customers, we sometimes encounter the worst unforeseen experiences and mishaps even with the best of intentions.
“In view of such a sobering reality, we feel duty bound to explain ourselves and send out a sincere and heartfelt apology to our clients and stakeholders at large.
“In August, we experienced an unfortunate situation with a valued client, who had booked a chin laser treatment.
“The client is a blogger, who is doing well with content creation and, given her expertise in that field, we agreed to her request to record the session for her blog seeing that we were confident of the outcome and we would equally benefit from the narrative as born out of the session documentation.”
Munemo added: “All this was done in good faith, considering our impeccable record since inception.
“Unfortunately, an error occurred during the treatment due to the use of a higher laser frequency not suitable for her skin type.
“We promptly apologised and suggested consulting a renowned dermatologist, covering the costs involved.
“Though we covered some of the costs as agreed, business viability affected our ability to consistently fulfil the set financial obligations.”
She said the client took to social media with videos insinuating negligence on their part and warning others against doing business with them.
“Regrettably, communication prior to her publicising the situation did not take place, as we believe a discussion would have led to a mutually satisfactory resolution and possibly a workable payment plan.
“Our efforts, to engage her for an amicable solution, have not been accepted as she opts for an all-out social media campaign against our brand.
“We, however, respect the client’s decision to go the route she took given the circumstances and the emotional torture the accident may have caused her.
“We pray that we find each other along the way.”