If you have paid good money for goods or services and feel that you have not got what you bargained for, you should see a solicitor without delay. A case on point concerned a man who paid about £4,000 for what he believed would be a surgical hair transplant but got what he viewed as a toupee.

The man underwent what was described as a step-by-step hair replacement which involved samples being taken from his scalp and matched to a fine mesh of human and synthetic hair that was later attached back onto his head using a bonding solution. He said that the result looked like a hairpiece and that he suffered an asthmatic reaction to the bonding agent.

Taking legal action against the company that provided the treatment, the man alleged that he was specifically reassured at a preliminary consultation that what he received would not be a wig. He claimed he had been misled into believing that he was to undergo a hair transplant. He was distraught to the point of tearfulness when that turned out not to be the case.

The company argued that he was advised at length about the nature of the treatment that he was to undergo and should have been under no illusions. The non-surgical hair grafting procedure was accurately described as hair replacement and there was never any suggestion that he would receive transplant surgery involving hair follicles.

Upholding the man’s claim, however, a judge found that he had given a truthful and compelling account of what he was told during the consultation. He contracted with the company on the basis that what he received would not be a wig. He was entitled to effectively rescind the contract and to claim his money back. Together with damages and interest, his total award came to £5,887.