S’pore Groomer Allegedly Cut Dog’s Tongue During Grooming Session
A local incident has left furparents in Singapore reeling, after an alleged case of injury during a grooming session at a local salon.
A man named Mr Lee Taiseng, published a lengthy account detailing the events which led up to his puppy’s tongue getting partially snipped off.
He named the salon involved as Paws Chu Kang, located near Bukit Panjang.
Shortly after his post went viral, the salon released a counter statement to tell their side of the story.
Here’s his post in full, we summarise the events below.
This is what the salon had to say in a Facebook post published on their page, 13 hours later on Wednesday (7 Aug).
Toy poodle sent for grooming, came back with injured tongue
A toy poodle named Mario was the victim of an injury after a grooming session on Friday (7 Jun), at around 10am.
Mr Lee describes Mario as a “well-behaved” doggo, and claims he has never received any complaints about him “misbehaving”.
After sending Mario for a grooming session which began at 10am, Mr Lee received a call from the owner of Paws Chu Kang at 3pm.
She allegedly told him over the phone that Mario’s tongue “was slit” and he was “bleeding non-stop” although ice had been applied to the “open wound”.
A concerned Mr Lee then agreed to meet them at the nearest vet after the call.
Salon owner claims dog was “active during grooming”
Upon meeting the groomer at the vet, Mr Lee claims that Nichelle attributed blame to Mario for being an “active dog” during grooming.
He also claimed that she asserted that she had “never met such an active dog in her grooming career”.
As for Mario’s injuries, they turned out to be more severe than initially expected.
Mr Lee describes the cut as extending “3/4 diagonally through his tongue” and the family had “no idea how long Mario was left bleeding” as there was no CCTV footage of the incident.
In his words,
They admitted that they did not inform me immediately after the incident happened. We have no idea when it happened between 10am and 3pm.
He further claims that Mario’s tongue “could have been salvaged” if they rushed him to the vet.
As a result of the “inaction”, the “dangling portion” had to be amputated, and Mario experienced a painful road to recovery with syringe & spoon feeding until he could re-learn how to use his shortened tongue.
Mr Lee claims salon didn’t immediately sack groomer involved
Mr Lee eventually decided to take the the dispute to social media, after an agreed compensation fell short of what was “initially agreed”.
Paws Chu Kang had allegedly “reimbursed the vet fees”, but Mr Lee claims they did not sack the groomer involved, or follow-through on an offer of compensation:
- Lifetime supplies of food
- Health supplements
- Grooming sessions
The dog’s owners share that they initially wanted to “donate the compensation” to animal charities, but decided against it as the salon seemed “insincere”.
Salon’s side of the story
Paws Chu Kang’s owner, posted a clarification on their side of the story 13 hours after the story went viral on Facebook.
She identified herself as Nichelle, and shared that the groomer involved was a licensed professional with 5 years of experience. He or she is also no longer working for the salon.
Reiterating her apology as a fellow dog owner, she claims that the salon has followed up with Mr Lee’s family “responsibly” since the day of the incident.
Mario wasn’t groomed immediately, claims salon
Nichelle claims that Mario reached the store at 10.40am and was allowed to “roam freely”, as the groomers worked on other dogs.
A 1-hour basic grooming was agreed upon, including a shower, trimming of nails, de-matting of fur — this happened from 1 to 1.30pm.
What follows is a timeline of events, in Nichelle’s own words leading up to the incident:
2.30pm-3.00pm: Trimming of leg fur
3.00pm-3.20pm: Trimming of face fur
3.20pm: Groomer’s scissors cut Mario’s tongue
3.24pm: Mrs Lee informed of incident, met with nearest vet, attempts to stop bleeding with gauze & ice
3.35pm-3.45pm: Arrived at vet
3.45pm-4pm: Vet attends to Emergency Case, Mr & Mrs Lee arrive. Vet says they can only begin surgery after working hours (9pm). Mario was left under the vet’s care until surgery.
9.43pm: Was told by Mrs Lee that vet had to amputate tongue as tissues are dead.
9.51pm: Mario’s surgery was done. Nichelle rushes down to vet immediately to bear all medical expenses.
At around 9.35am the next morning, Nichelle claims she transfered S$500 to Mrs Lee to cover transport expenses for Mario’s future travel expense.
According to her, the money was returned via PayNow as Mrs Lee said “she was good for it”.
Salon owner claims to have followed up on case
Nichelle further claims that she followed up every 2 to 5 days on Mario’s recovery, and offered to “pay a visit to Mario”.
On 13 Jun, she received a text from Mrs Lee with an update of Mario’s recovery after the “stitches had dissolved”. After which Nichelle claims to have “promptly transferred the bill amount” for the follow-up vet visit.
An apology letter was also drafted, as Nichelle says she met the family at their home.
Compensation amount was S$22,000
About a month later, Nichelle claims that Mr and Mrs Lee requested a compensation of “10-15 years of food supply on a monthly basis for Mario”.
And this changed to a “lump sum cash payment”, in a follow-up text via WhatsApp.
Nichelle claims the estimated sum was S$22,000, which was “huge” and beyond her “financial capability” and thus resorted to seeking “legal advice”.
She counter offered a sum of S$1,300, but claims the family requested for a sum of S$18,000 next. And concluded her post with affirming that it was untrue that the family wasn’t informed of Mario’s injury immediately.
Nichelle also refutes the allegations that she didn’t honour the compensation amount and does not blame Mario for the incident.
We just hope Mario is okay now
After all that Mario has been through, we just hope that his owners and the salon manage to find a way to resolve their differences. Most importantly that he’ll only have happy memories to make after this traumatic incident.
Typically, dogs do tend to make a full recovery from partial glossectomy – aka tongue removal surgery – with proper aftercare, and continue to lead normal lives.
Do you think Mario’s owners requests were justified, or were the groomer’s conciliatory gestures sufficient? Sound out the comments below.
Featured image adapted from Facebook.
