SINGAPORE: In a first, two businesses under nail salon chain Nail Palace have been fined S$ 15, 000 ( US$ 11, 500 ) each, while their managing director , was sentenced to four months ‘ jail, after being found guilty of contempt of court,  , the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) said on Tuesday ( Sep 10 ).
In connection with unfair trade practices involving the sale of anti-fungal treatment packages, Nail Palace ( BPP ), Nail Palace ( SM), and managing director Kaiden Cheng were taken to the court for failing to follow court orders  .
This was the first time, according to CCCS, that it had brought hatred proceedings against a wayward company and its manager for breaking for court orders.
The consumer watchdog in Singapore added that this was the first time it had awarded a” substantial” fine and jail term to those who had violated the Consumer Protection ( Fair Trading ) Act ( CPFTA ).
The judge’s decision to okay the NP entities and impose a judicial statement on Kaiden Cheng “reflects its disapproval of wayward suppliers who blatantly disregard judge orders,” said CCCS.
UNFAIR Procedures
Nail Palace ( BPP ) and Nail Palace ( SM)  , operate the chain’s outlets at Bukit Panjang Plaza and Eastpoint Mall in Simei respectively. According to its site, Nail Palace has 25 shops in Singapore, offering solutions such as manicures, pedicures and waxing.
On Dec 17, 2021, CCCS took legal actions in the State Courts, seeking , statements and prohibitions against both firms for , having engaged in one or more cruel practices under the Act, following complaints by several consumers.
The Act contains what’s known as Singapore’s “lemon law”, which provides remedies against defective goods ( lemons ). These are items that fail to meet standards of quality and efficiency, even after repeated maintenance.
Investigations revealed that both Nail Palace companies made false or deceptive statements to customers about the necessity of an anti-fungal care package.
A client was misled by the Simei store by the outlet by claiming that some lipsticks and lip balms were included in an anti-fungal therapy package. The buyer was rather billed for the items, said CCCS.
In August and September 2022, a district judge ordered both businesses , to consider they had , engaged in an unjust practice by misleading a customer over the need for anti-fungal remedy or a anti-fungal care item.
The Simei store also had to say that it had committed a distinct unfair process by not disclosing that certain lipsticks and lip oils were included in the price of an anti-fungal care package.
Both companies were given injunctions to prevent them from engaging in such harsh procedures and required to publish the details in four significant Singapore newspapers.
Additionally, they were required to inform customers that they had engaged in unfair practices and to first request written confirmation before signing a contract with them. This was going to last for two years.
In July 2023, the High Court rejected both of their appeals, with both businesses being informed that they must” comply with the orders with immediate effect.”