1 /5 Kalisse Haney: At my initial consultation, I was quoted $600 for a coloring service, upon checkout, I was recommended a product kit with no visible pricing. Before I was informed of the total, my Apple Pay was charged $130. I later found the same kit, sold by the manufacturer, for $58 online.When I raised the issue, staff acknowledged the overcharge, stating it should have been $112. At that time, however, my coloring quote was suddenly increased to $1,100, x 3-4 appointments an unrealistic jump, especially in the Amarillo market.Given that the salon does not offer services for curly hair—such as curly cuts or appropriate treatments—the store credit was not usable. Ultimately filed a dispute through my bank and revived a full refund.
Their no-return policy was not clearly disclosed at the time of purchase, which I believe is where the misunderstanding lies. While the business may believe they acted within their rights, this is a misinterpretation of consumer protection laws. The matter has since been referred to the Texas Attorney Generals Office and other relevant agencies for further review.
Below are some of the messages I received from what I assume was the front desk worker over the course of several hours:
EDIT: My formal letter sent to Texas Cosmetology Program with the assistance of the Office of Texas Attorney General. With it I attached photo evidence of their incorrect account of “years of box dye” as well as the “aggressive” messages that include my voicing my rights as a consumer.
I am writing to formally express my concern regarding the unprofessional and potentially discriminatory treatment I received from WhiteFox Salon. The salon has made misleading claims about the condition of my hair, including alleging “years” of box dye usage—claims which are not only untrue but contradicted by photographic evidence of my nearly level-two hair from 2022, which I have attached for your review.
This situation has evolved beyond poor service and now includes harassment and defamation, both of which raise serious concerns. I have refrained from returning to the salon since the initial consultation, which was originally positive. However, the experience quickly deteriorated after I voiced concern about the salon significantly overcharging for a product—an issue I brought up in good faith.
What’s especially disturbing is the use of language like “aggressive” to describe me—a term that is both inappropriate and racially coded, particularly considering the demographic context of the salon and myself, as well as other reviewers who share similar hair textures. Such descriptors are unacceptable and contribute to a hostile and discriminatory narrative that is deeply concerning.
Furthermore, the salon has refused to allow me, a paying customer, to return a starter kit—despite the fact that this product holds no unique salon-specific authentication and is available through certified third-party dealers. The salon even acknowledged that they overcharged me but have failed to fully remedy the situation. Their offer of a store credit is unacceptable, especially since they do not provide services suitable for my hair type or texture and have admitted they are not licensed to do so.
Given this troubling pattern, I have submitted comprehensive documentation and it is my hope that these agencies will investigate the recurring consumer complaints and potential violations of ethical and anti-discrimination standards by WhiteFox Salon.
I urge all potential clients, particularly those with textured or curly hair, to approach with caution. The salon’s unwillingness to resolve this matter fairly and professionally is telling and warrants thorough oversight.
Sincerely,
Kalisse Haney
