S'pore woman pays damages to beauty salon after lawsuit, but not found to have improper motive

Unsatisfied with her experience at a beauty salon, a content creator took to Instagram to criticise its business practices, calling it a "scam".

Beauti Instinct, the salon located in Far East Shopping Centre, sued her for defamation and won.

However, the judge did find that Mok had genuinely felt trapped and had misgivings about the salon.

Mok Wai Kwan, who goes by Vivian Mok on Instagram, was ordered to pay S$15,000 in damages, according to a judgment dated Oct. 15.

Series of Instagram stories

In February and March 2025, she posted a series of Instagram stories about the salon after doing several treatment sessions there since 2020.

The salon argued that Mok’s stories alleged that they were cheating customers and operating under deceptive business practices.

On the first day she posted about the salon, she pinned the stories as a highlight on her Instagram page and titled it "SCAM !!"

Among other things, the Stories described the salon as “HELL”, and said it should be reported to the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE).

Mok also claimed she was "completely trapped by this unethical business model", but could not report the salon as she still had a lot of unused credit with them.

The judge ultimately found that Mok had genuinely felt trapped and had misgivings about the salon, but could not support her statements that the business was unethical.

Experience at the salon

Mok received treatments at the salon on 26 occasions between 2020 and 2025, beginning with a six-session Silk Peel Glow Facial package for S$488.

She said that during her first visit, the salon's director, Cheang Norita, told her the Silk Peel treatment was unsuitable on its own because of her sensitive skin and that she would need additional treatments.

Cheang disputed Mok's account, saying she had presented several options, including allowing Mok to proceed with the package she had already bought.

Mok subsequently signed up for a S$1,000 trial membership, then purchased a S$5,000 Gold membership, and a further S$6,624 worth of packages.

Allegations on Instagram

From Feb. 13, 2025, Mok posted a series of Instagram Stories about her experience with the salon.

The allegations include facing pressure to sign up for increasingly expensive memberships, an inconsistent explanation of credit usage, and a lack of transparency over pricing and refund policies.

She later pinned the Stories to her Instagram profile as a Highlight titled “SCAM !!”.

Among other things, the Stories described the salon as “HELL”, said it should be reported to the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE), and referred to what Mok called an “unethical business model”.

Mok changed the Highlight's title from “SCAM !!” to “BEWARE!!” on Apr. 11, 2025, before eventually removing it.

The court found that a reasonable viewer who viewed the Stories directly, without the “SCAM !!” Highlight title, would understand them as alleging that the salon had unethical business practices or an unethical business model.

Those who viewed them through the Highlight while it was titled “SCAM !!” would additionally understand Mok to be accusing the salon of being a business designed to cheat or defraud customers, the judge found.

At around the time of the posts, Mok had 8,223 Instagram followers.

Her Instagram analytics showed that the Stories were viewed 401 times by 265 unique accounts.

The “SCAM !!” title was available for about two months, while the Stories themselves remained accessible for about five months before being removed in around July 2025.

Truthfulness of her account

Mok argued that the statements in her Stories were a truthful account of her personal experience with the salon, and that she posted them in good faith to warn others.

This experience included alleged pressure to sign up for increasingly expensive memberships, an inconsistent explanation of credit usage, and a lack of transparency over pricing and refund policies.

The judge accepted that Mok's experience with the claimant as narrated in the Stories was true, and that she had genuine misgivings.

Not proven salon was unethical or attempting to cheat customers

However, the judge found that while Mok might have considered the salon’s business practices unsatisfactory, she had not proven that they were unethical or attempting to cheat customers.

Mok had accepted that she was not forced to buy memberships, and had benefited from receiving treatments at discounted member rates.

She had also agreed that the salon was not only interested in making money without concern for customers' well-being, which the judge found contradictory to her portrayal of the business as unethical or a scam.

Furthermore, the court rejected Mok's defence of fair comment. It found that statements including "SCAM !!" and that the salon "should be reported to CASE" would be understood as statements of fact rather than comments.

Issue of motive

Given the contradictions, the judge found that Mok did not genuinely believe what she stated in her Stories.

"At best therefore, this was a case of buyer’s remorse," the judge said.

But they were not persuaded that Mok had a dominant motive of harming the salon or some other improper motive.

After she had posted the Stories, the salon reached out seeking an "open conversation", but Mok declined, saying that there was nothing to talk about unless the salon was willing to discuss a refund for its services.

The judge noted that the issue of refund was only raised when the salon reached out, and thus did not believe Mok's motivation for publishing the Stories was to exact a refund.

No damages for alleged loss of business

After considering the relevant factors and comparable cases, the judge awarded Beauti Instinct S$15,000 in general damages.

However, the court did not agree with the salon's argument that Mok's Stories led to a drop in sales and new customers, as it had not proven that the decline was caused solely by the Stories.

The judge therefore declined to award special damages.

They also rejected Beauti Instinct's request for an injunction, finding no evidence that Mok was likely to repeat the defamatory allegations.

Mok's response

Following the verdict, Mok told Mothership that she had posted her genuine thoughts on the matter based on her own experience, and sought to resolve the matter amicably before it proceeded to trial, she said.

As the salon asked for what she felt was "an extravagant sum" of S$75,000 in damages, she decided to defend herself in court.

She said she was glad the court found that such substantial damages could not be justified, and that the alleged business losses were not proved.