A former RCMP officer who spent thousands of dollars at a Halifax spa to get rid of his “love handles” is warranted a complete refund, a Nova Scotia’s small claims court has ruled.
Policy Disagreement
The spa’s website describes the Emsculpt Neo procedure as an advanced non-invasive body contouring technique that reduces fat and enhances muscle development without the need for surgical intervention or recovery time.Spa policy at the time promised free treatments if the initial round of body sculpting didn’t work, Marin told the court.
“However, after following all of the treatment guidelines and not seeing any notable improvement, Bodyworks failed to honour their Emsculpt Neo Results promise and retreat me for free,” he said.
Under the policy, customers had to stay hydrated, exercise, and ensure their weight remained the same or decreased “without notable fluctuations.” The promise also did not apply if the customer smoked or drank excessively.
Marin told the court he followed these instructions and felt he was entitled to the free treatments because he was unhappy that his love handles had not improved.
When he requested his free treatments, the spa declined, saying he decided to change his treatment plan after the consultation and initial treatment. The spa also said his ‘before’ and ‘after’ treatment photos showed visible results, the court document said.
Richardson noted that Marin was physically fit, but was recovering from a stroke and experiencing some balance issues at the time of his treatments. His main reason for seeking the treatments was that “no matter how much he exercised he had been unable to reduce the love handles on the side of his abdomen.”
Marin met with the manager at the spa in late November 2023 to discuss treatments, Richardson noted in his ruling. The manager was also the aesthetician administering the treatments.
They discussed fat reduction, and core strengthening and balance control as well as love handle reduction, according to Marin’s testimony.
When he asked if the Emsculpt Neo treatment would help reduce them, the manager said that it would, Richardson wrote.
He noted that the manager didn’t recall love handles being discussed and testified the discussion was about core strength and balance control.
After Marin’s first treatment, his wife expressed concern that the applicator used was not focusing on his love handles. After that discussion, the aesthetician “switched to using a ‘paddle,’ or applicator, that was clamped to the side love handles,” Richardson said.
There was no evidence that Marin was told the switch in applicator would “negate or limit” the promise for re-treatment, the adjudicator said.
Spa owner Catherine Crosby told the court that Marin’s change in treatment “meant that the promise was voided.”
“The (spa) could not re-treat someone who had treatment in one area and then switched to five treatments in a different area,” she said.
The adjudicator sided with Marin, however, noting that his love handles were “prominent in the ‘before’ photos taken by the (spa). That prominence lends weight to the probability that his concern existed, and would have been discussed.”
He noted there was no difference in the love handles in the after-treatment photos.
Richardson said he was “satisfied on the evidence that Mr. Marin’s love handles were part of his treatment plan” and noted that shifting methods after the first treatment did not constitute a change that was “sufficient to negate or void the promise.”
He ordered the spa to reimburse Marin in full.
