At a time when people are rioting and the coronavirus is raging, nothing serves as a better distraction than a good old Facebook spat.
Arguments on the platform, which can sometimes go on for eternity, are as common these days as meat-free burgers.
This time, it’s between an aggrieved pet owner and a pet groomer.
Customer Claims Dog’s Coat Was Shaved Without Any Instruction
It all started with a Facebook post on 9 Jan.
Dog owner Henny You recounted her unpleasant experience after bringing her Pomeranian dog, Dede, to The Precious Pets, a mobile pet grooming company in Singapore.
On 9 Jan, the groomer, Ong, went over to You’s house at 10am to groom her dog.
This was You’s first time with The Precious Pets, so she showed Ong photos of what her dog looked like after its grooming sessions with its previous groomer.
You also requested that Dede be given a Shiba Inu cut, and informed Ong that the previous groomer only used scissors, and no shavers, to trim Dede’s fur.
She then left Dede along with Ong in the room.
When she came back, she got the shock of her life.
This was how Dede looked before the grooming session:
And this is how the Pomeranian looked after the grooming session:
“To our horror, the groomer shaved all the fur, all gone outer and inner coat all gone. ALL GONE!” You said.
You said she cried and trembled the whole day.
Refused to Pay Groomer
You claimed she never instructed the groomer to shave all of her dog’s fur, including her inner coat.
Speaking to Mothership, You said Dede now constantly shivers and needs two layers of clothes and a blanket to keep warm.
They refused to pay the $100 fee for the grooming session, and asked for the owner of the company to call them.
Instead of receiving an apology, they received a text message on WhatApp claiming Ong was simply following the instructions of You’s husband.
So, what does the groomer have to say about the incident?
The groomer, Ong, responded with a Facebook post of her own on Monday (11 Jan).
According to the post, You was led to the grooming room by a domestic helper, where she was met by You’s husband.
Ong claimed that You’s husband was the only one present in the room before the session started.
“I assumed he was the one in-charge of giving me instructions on the grooming,” Ong said.
“I started the mandatory pre-grooming consultation and asked how short he would like me to cut Dede’s hair. To which he replied, ‘Short.’ I clarified asking, ‘How short? Botak?’ He said ‘Not so short.”
When Ong was retrieving her grooming tools, You’s husband instructed her to use their tools instead.
He was referring to an adjustable pet shaver and 3 pairs of grooming scissors.
Ong pointed out that using the portable shaver provided would result in a rather short cut, and asked if he was sure about using the shaver.
You’s husband said he was.
At this point, You entered the room.
Ong repeated her question to both of them – whether they were sure about wanting her to use their home shaver on Dede – while emphasising that it would mean Dede would be ‘botak’.
“They both replied a firm ‘Yes’ several times”, she said.
At that point, You noted that Dede’s previous groomer user a pair of scissors and not a shaver.
Concerned, Ong once again asked them if they were sure they wanted her to use their home shaver, even though Dede would become ‘botak’, and You’s husband said yes.
“Botak Still Got Fur?”
Ong found it difficult to groom Dede with the home shaver, and left the room 5 minutes into the session to inform You or her husband about her troubles.
She found You’s husband, showed him a shaved patch on Dede, and asked him if she could use her own tools for the rest of the session.
He then left the room to ask You, and came back telling Dede that she could.
“Botak still got fur hor?” he asked Ong, commenting on the small shaved patch on Dede.
Ong explained that there would still be 2mm of fur left on the dog. She then continued grooming Dede with her own 2mm shaver.
When she had shaved half of Dede’s body, You’s husband came in and commented, “Wah.”
“I looked at him trying to understand what he meant by that, and I replied ‘Why?’. He said in English ‘Later you will know. And he left the room. I didn’t know what to make of it, so I proceeded to complete the grooming based on the given instructions,” she said.
When Ong was almost done with the grooming, You walked in and started crying after seeing Dede, claiming her dog’s fur had never been cut so short before.
“Don’t Listen to My Husband”
Later on, when You calmed down, she told Ong to trim Dede’s face to look like a Shiba Inu.
“It’s a miscommunication. Next time don’t listen to my husband, he don’t know anything one,” You allegedly said.
At this point, You’s husband was infuriated, and was slamming doors to show his anger, and Ong said in her post that she felt unsafe.
He also refused to pay Ong and demanded to speak to her boss.
Flamed on Social Media
Ong said her name has been spread around social media ever since the incident came to light, which has caused her a lot of distress.
Thus, she felt she had to make some clarifications over the incident.
“I would also like to emphasize that there is no logical reason I would sabotage my own career which I love by shaving down a client’s dog without instructions to do so,” she wrote.
Ong said she is professionally certified and has 2 years of experience in pet grooming.
“I love animals and I have been working professionally with pets since 2018”.
“This unfair portrayal of what really happened will affect how my new customers view me as a groomer. I really hope that this matter can be clarified soon,” she added.
So, who was in the wrong here?
Featured Image: Facebook (Bossa Nova Queen)