Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Took my 18-month old in there for a haircut - asked the guy if he did children, and he said yes, seemed quite welcoming. Mentioned that my son hated hairdressers and it might not go too well. I should have realised when he asked me to put him directly in the chair, rather than me holding him, that the guy had zero experience of toddlers. I insisted on sitting him on my lap and holding his head and arms in a vice-like grip and my son proceeded to scream his head off and wriggle for the duration of the haircut. No surprises there to parents reading this.


Anyway, after doing one side and the top, I mentioned that it was a bit short on top and quite unevenly cut on the side (I'd asked for him not to cut it too short). He stood back incredulous and saying, what do you expect (inference to my wriggling son). I pointed out that other haircuts hadn't been so uneven, at which point the guy went berserk, shouted at me for being rude, whipped off my apron and ordered me out of the shop. I had to spend 5 mins apologising, grovelling and begging in order to get him to finish the haircut. Which he finally did, grudgingly, and didn't say anything more until he just put his scissors down and said, right, I've had enough, that kid's going to have a heart attack (haircut was mostly finished except one side by his ear). I knew when to quit. I pointed out that the screaming wasn't bothering me and that sometimes kids don't like stuff and will have to just scream.


Anyway the guy moved on to the next customer, refused to look at me or speak to me and wouldn't take my money - not sure if this shows guilt, immaturity, unprofessionalism or all 3 (I would have left some money but only had a 20 quid note and was not paying that condsidering I left the place in tears)


Were my expectations too high? Maybe. But if I behaved like that when someone criticised me at work I would be fired. I certainly won't be going back and I would advise anyone with children to steer clear of this bad-tempered barber.

Maybe next time you could get a home hairdresser to pop round and give your wee man some chocolate or a treat to keep him busy...worked great with mine. I know that barbers on Northcross Road are always really busy and have never seen kids in there...

I think GM's are supposed to be really great with the kids and their haircuts, you could try there? Sounds very stressful!!!

I have had three very successful visits to the barbers on Lordship Lane next to SMBS - I think they are called Jazz Barbers. My son started going at 18 months and thoroughly enjoys the trip. Mr Jazz the Barber talks merrily about Mr Tumble and Thomas the Tank Engine and has been known to provide a lolly at the end of the haircut!
Sorry to hear of your bad experience. I would also recommend Jazz Barbers, the guy there is completely up to speed with all CBeeBees characters and has a great manner with small children (I think he has young children himself). I also recently took my son to Barry Road barbers and they were great too.

My 2.5 yr old boy just had his first haircut at GM's on Melbourne Grove.He had his hair washed next to me while I had mine done. He went off happily with the hairdresser while my hairwash was finished.I went round the corner to see him sitting happily on a highchair sipping juice and munching a biscuit while his hair was combed.He had a great haircut and staff generally kept an eye on him while I had my hair cut.I was very impressed.They put a lock of his hair in an envelope and called me the next day to say his certificate was ready!Great first haircut experience.


Sorry you both had a bad time - I don't think your expectations were too high.

That sounds like a really stressful experience and totally unneccessary. Lots of children, including both of mine, don't like the hairdresser but that can be managed without making you feel that bad. What a horrible thing to do. I took my 2.5 yr old son to Headnizm who actually let him walk about a bit towards the end of the haircut, and the lovely woman just pottered along behind him tidying up bits of his hair as he went. She chatted to him and gave him sweets and though it wasn't a perfect cut because he is very wiggly, it was more than good enough. She charged me ?5. I'd highly recommend going to them to sort out your sons hair if you aren't happy with it still, and don't worry. You were not to blame here!
If you are not far from Nunhead, Network on Evelina rd, are good, they have a special child's chair, low rates for the under 8s (5 pounds I think) and the child's first cut is free.One of the hairdressers has young children and another is pregnant, so its a pretty child friendly place.

Taking young children to the barbers is definitely not for the faint hearted!


We have been taking our two youngest boys (2 & 4) to Uomo (next to Fabric on LL) soon after it opened about a year or so ago. Our boys are very high spirited and not easy to deal with but Francisco is fantastic with them. He's really gentle, patient and understands that kids don't necessarily enjoy the experience nor like sitting still. Our boys have really taken to him now and I'd highly recommend him. Ironically he used to work at Clippers in North X road before leaving to start up his own salon.

I would just like to say that I had a really positive experience at this same NorthX Road Barbers a few weeks ago. I took my son (7) there on a Saturday half expecting to be turned away as lots of hairdressers refuse to cut children's hair on a Saturday. There was no mention of this though, although they were busy. I found the Barber to be very accomodating and my son left feeling chuffed to bits with his new spiky gelled hair!

My eldest had so little hair as a baby that she didn't need her first haircut until well after she turned 3. As a result it was all a big adventure - she wanted to 'have her hair done like Mummy' so thankfully no trauma at all. Phew. No idea if girls are generally easier, or if leaving it later was the key, but very glad not to have had to have the battles - which sound horrible for all involved.


My 2nd has hair...already, at 14 months, so maybe we'll have to brave a cut sooner...will do my best to avoid it tough!


Molly

blimey.

whats wrong with cutting it yourself........leaving it to grow long till older............big bribery with smarties or having a go while they are asleep with a pair of nail scissors.

Maybe the barber had had a bad day of east dulwich mums. thankfully hair grows!!

I too have had a great experience at GM's. My 14 month old was given a toy to play with while the young lady cutting his hair was quick and friendly while chatting to my son to keep his attention.


Your experience sounds outrageous and I wouldn't even have considered paying for an unfinished haircut, especially when spoken to in the manor you were.

I just hope your kid doesn't grow up to be a spoiled little brat.

It's never too early to start disciplining your kids.

I'd act fast, before they turn into those things that run up & down & into the stores of Northcross Rd, imitating animals as they drag things off of the shelves & you are standing there -completely oblivious of your surroundings - sniffing scented candles, as your motor pram blocks the path of other potential customers...


Sorry, but I just can't sympathize.


An 18 month old child does not need to be taken to a hairdressers at such a young age. If you really felt this necessary, you could have done it yourself - no need to be snobbish about it. Pinning your kid down will not help the situation. It does not only make him look like some kind of untamable animal, It makes you look bad, it makes your hairdresser look bad (infront of his awaiting customers!). Just to top it all off, you criticizing a hairdressers job is just bang out of order. You should be thankful. It is not a hairdressers job to cut peoples hair as they are flying about, screaming. Chairs are put there for a reason.

I think most of what Forgetmenot has posted is obviously bonkers, but there is a grain of sense in there. Why on earth are you taking a todder who loathes it to the hairdresser, and how on earth do you expect any barber to cut the hair of someone who is squirming and writhing.


I take my two to GMs, or at least I did. They are great with the elder, who will sit motionless until its done. The younger doesn't. It's not that she doesn't like hairdressers, just that she is a terrible fidget, so it took forever and the poor hairdresser had a terrible time; so now I do it at home. I sit her in front of Cbeebies and it doesn't matter if it takes for ever or if a sudden movement means its not entirely straight. When she's a bit better at sitting still, I'll give the hairdressers a go again, but at the moment there are several downsides and no upsides to not doing it myself.


I don't think it is fair to a barber/hairdresser to expect them to cut the hair of someone who is constantly moving. And I don't think it is fair on your son to have to undergo what is obviously a traumatic experience for him just for the sake of shorter hair. He'd probably be far happier if you did it with clippers at home.

I can understand the OP being upset at how things turned out, but it's not really fair to the business in question to post on here saying 'don't go there'. On the basis of this experience there's no reason to think they won't deal perfectly well with other kids, especially those who are a bit older or who don't 'hate hairdressers'.

I've never taken my three year old for a cut, don't have the nerve. I have always cut his hair myself while he's in the bath. He doesn't really even notice; a snip here and there once in a while to keep the back and sides looking presentable. Then I hose him off at the end of the bath. I have no idea what I'm doing, but on my list of things I need to do to feel like a proper mother putting us through the hell of a haircut is somewhere around the bottom.


Plus I'm scared he'd lose an ear!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...