A Texas salon owner says she scheduled a customer on her male stylist’s day off so the woman could remove her hijab in privacy. It was a practical solution until the appointment ran long and the customer needed to come back the next day. By then, the stylist was back at work. The salon couldn’t promise the same arrangement twice, and a scheduling problem soon became a public dispute over its Google rating.

The customer had been to the salon before, owner Sullivan told Parenting Patch. On that visit, she’d had her hair done in a private room where men couldn’t see her without her hijab. Renovations had since eliminated that room, so the salon offered a Tuesday appointment when its male stylist wasn’t scheduled.

The customer had booked a color treatment, a Brazilian blowout and a haircut. Sullivan said the appointment took longer than expected, in part because the stylist and customer used translated messages to communicate. The woman had to leave before the haircut was finished and arranged to return Wednesday.

The salon tried to find a time when the male stylist wouldn’t be working with a client. He was still in the building, though, and the customer believed she’d been promised there would be no men present. That was a distinction the salon could have made clearer before she returned. But guaranteeing that no man would walk in during business hours would have meant controlling who came through the door, from customers to delivery workers.

Sullivan offered an alternative: book an after-hours appointment, lock the doors and provide the privacy the customer wanted. There would be an extra charge for the special booking. The customer was free to turn that down, but it was a concrete offer from a business that had already adjusted its schedule to help her once.

According to Sullivan, the woman thanked her stylist before leaving but indicated she might go elsewhere next time. About 20 minutes later, Sullivan said, a one-star Google review appeared criticizing the salon’s service, prices and the owner’s conduct. Sullivan replied with an apology for the misunderstanding and explained what the salon could and couldn’t promise during regular hours.

More negative reviews followed, including complaints about cleanliness, pricing and appointment timing. Sullivan suspected they were connected to the dispute, but that connection hasn’t been independently established. She said the salon’s rating dropped to 4.5 stars and later returned to 4.6 after Google removed some reviews. Google’s reasons for removing them weren’t confirmed.

The customer had a reasonable reason to ask for privacy. The salon had a reasonable limit on what it could guarantee in a shop open to the public. Sullivan could have been more explicit about Wednesday’s arrangement, but she also offered a way to give the customer the privacy she wanted. For a small business, that effort deserves to count for something—even when the answer can’t be yes at the original price and time.