Author Topic: klw_xox - Fallowfield, South Manchester (incall)  (Read 2442 times)


1 review(s) for this service provider (AdultWork - 5086179) (0 positive, 1 neutral, 0 negative) [Indexed by NigelF]

Offline NigelF

Link: External Link/Members Only

There's currently no info about this WG on here so obviously that ought to change. She's usually outcall only but I saw her fairly recently when she was offering incalls.

Price: £75 for 30 mins (incall).

Location: Fallowfield. Given the nature of her location/flat and the fact that she doesn't usually offer incalls, I'll be less specific than usual however contributing members can feel free to PM me if they want a more detail. Her flat was basically fine.

Looks: Since I saw her she's removed the face pic that she had up. That's actually a good thing because that face pic was very flattering, it made her look prettier and indeed quite a lot thinner than she actually is. The pics that are currently up are a bit flattering, particularly size wise but not as much. She claims to be a size 12 but in person she's almost certainly bigger, I'd say size 14. She claims to have 36E's, the chest circumference (36") might be right but I'm sure the cup size isn't and you can see that from her pics. I'd say she's around a D cup. Her arse is quite big, certainly nice.

Facially, in comparison to her face pic she was definitely disappointing but generally I still thought she was quite pretty (although as suggested, has some chubbiness to her face too). She's had lip fillers which are noticeable but not massively so and they're not overly firm when kissing. Overall, I was disappointed but I also expected to be misled (because so many WGs do) and I was still happy enough not walk.

I have a feeling the same can't be said for one of her other punters though. I suspect this because a few days after our meet, she sent me this message: "Hey sorry for the late feedback, I've just put it through on aw, hope you find what you're looking for for next time x". I was clearly not the intended recipient because she didn't leave me feedback, not least because I never even put a booking through (I almost never do unless asked). Given how she ended the message I have a feeling the punter (intend recipient) walked. I might be wrong though, maybe he expressed some disappointment at the end of the punt (unlikely) or possibly she was referring to something he said which wasn't really related to her.

Assuming I'm right, it's a shame that punter didn't leave a review on here or at least a negative or neutral bit of feedback on her profile (regardless of being given a positive) although at least it seems he hasn't left her a positive either (although I don't know for sure).

Service: This is where her profile is accurate. At the start she actually sat on the sofa and tried engaged in small talk. I usually try to skip this part (and it's rare that WGs even bother) but since it was written on her profile I engaged with her for a minute or two. Then I pushed the meet onwards because I always find pre-punt chat to be unnecessary (at least on my part) and to be a likely timewasting tactic although in this case it certainly wasn't. She was pleasant to talk to (both before and after) and seemingly not as thick as most young people these days so if you like talking to WGs then this one will likely fit the bill well.

She delivered proper DFK and plenty of it throughout (indeed even more keen to initiate it than me). OWO was good as was the depth. Onto sex which was enjoyed in a variety of positions and was definitely enthusiastic. Her attitude throughout was very good and she definitely didn't rush or clock watch.

The service overall was very good and was a rather "authentic" GFE.

Overall: Given some of the misleading aspects of her profile (particularly the face pic), she definitely doesn't deserve a positive but certainly not a negative either, especially given her service.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2019, 12:02:38 am by NigelF »

Offline freeze44

Cheers for this Nigel and good to see you back  :thumbsup:

Had looked at the profile and some of the pics looked hot but had an idea she is bigger than shown and your review confirmed that!  :hi:

Pity as sure plenty into that type of body so seems silly posting misleading ones and getting punters turn up who not into that??! 

Online frankc

Cheers for this Nigel and good to see you back  :thumbsup:

Had looked at the profile and some of the pics looked hot but had an idea she is bigger than shown and your review confirmed that!  :hi:


Thanks for the review Nigel, I agree with Freeze, I'm always a little suspicious of pictures taken looking down on a girl as its usually a sign of her being a little larger than she actually is.


Offline NigelF

Thanks for the review Nigel, I agree with Freeze, I'm always a little suspicious of pictures taken looking down on a girl as its usually a sign of her being a little larger than she actually is.

Indeed, it's definitely a bad sign and an additional part of the reason why I was expecting misleading pics. Face pics are pretty easy to manipulate too, e.g. if they just stick their head forward (hard to notice/identify) they can make their facial profile (especially jawline) look a lot slimmer although in this case I also think the pic might have been a bit old.

Offline NigelF

Looks: Since I saw her she's removed the face pic that she had up. That's actually a good thing because that face pic was very flattering, it made her look prettier and indeed quite a lot thinner than she actually is.

She just sent me an unsolicited text sarcastically thanking me for posting this review (unsurprising and certainly not the first girl to do similar). This has prompted me to notice that she's put that flattering face pic back up on her profile. To be totally clear, here it is:

Hidden Image/Members Only

The other pics still seem to be the same as the ones I refer to in this review but they're obviously liable to change in the future.