Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

UKPunting is a free, independent and not-for-profit paid sex buyer site.




Author Topic: Cheryl of Loughborough. Walked  (Read 5112 times)


4 review(s) for Cheryl (3 positive, 0 neutral, 1 negative) [Indexed by Admin]


https://www.adultwork.com/23524

Sorry I don't log in or post much but I do when I think its worth posting and have been meaning to post this review for a few weeks but thought it was best to wait until I was less annoyed...

Based on this review I booked to see Cheryl a few weeks back. https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=70556.msg893724#msg893724

Comms were fairly straightforward and I arranged to meet her in a hotel in the centre of Loughborough. I had read a previous punters comment that she had a slight tremor in one of her hands but this didn't worry me too much, the last review above never mentioned this so I didn't think it could be a major issue. In fact I could find no other post linked to Cheryl that mentioned this issue or anything like it. So imagine my surprise when I walked in to find someone who looked like a 60 year old woman in advance stages of Parkinsons disease; the phrase shaking like a shitting dog springs to mind. Both her hands were shaking so uncontrollably that I have no doubt she'd struggle to even undress herself so I made my excuses and left. Whilst on the one hand I did have some sympathy, on the other hand I was annoyed that this woman is still working under the illusion that she fit and healthy when she is probably close to needing care support. In my opinion she shouldn't be working and if she continues then she needs to make a clear  statement of her profile that she has quite advanced Parkinsons disease. I'm at a complete loss to understand how only one punter could even make reference to this issue and I would hazard a guess that the condition has worsened considerably since that review. Possibly my most shocking experience to date!


4 review(s) found for Cheryl linked to in above post (3 positive, 0 neutral, 1 negative)

Online mediumjoe

All very strange , I know AW ratings are a load of rubbish but she has 5 good ones in the last 3 weeks . This is a bit annoying as she was on my trimmed bush hl , dont suppose it was her mother standing in for her ? Joking but then again this is punting and anything can and does happen !! Joe

I think she has a review from 2004 stating that she's 41 so she's at least 53 but looks 60, grey hair roots as I remember and really unattractive. So if it was her mum then she'd be circa 70 to 80. Too much of a coincidence not to be her given the previous comment on the hand tremor. I look forward to someone else confirming what I have said if they are unfortunate enough to miss this review and turn up. I was really annoyed to have wasted my time when she is clearly duping punters this way.  I wonder how many go through with it from sheer sympathy but as I said, its really not on!

Online mediumjoe

Thanks for that Ted .big red line through that one now . Sounds like you have saved us all a lousy experience . Well done for walking by the way Joe

Thanks for that Ted .big red line through that one now . Sounds like you have saved us all a lousy experience . Well done for walking by the way Joe

No problem. On this occasion I'm happy for others to benefit from my terrible experience.  :hi:

I know AW ratings are a load of rubbish but she has 5 good ones in the last 3 weeks .

I can only see one from 4/7/16 and then nothing until a year prior?

Offline CoolTiger

I can only see one from 4/7/16 and then nothing until a year prior?

Methinks MJ did not realise that the 2nd rating, and going back was exactly 1 YEAR before the first one. A quick glance could easily mis-read all the 2015's as 2016.

Online RedKettle

Many thanks - she has been on my HL for years simply as a contingency if ever stuck in Loughborough, however now removed!!

Many thanks - she has been on my HL for years simply as a contingency if ever stuck in Loughborough, however now removed!!

Thank your lucky stars that you weren't!

Makes this review seem a bit sick in the circumstances. Each to their own but slapping about a Parkinson's patient isn't my idea of fun.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=70556.msg893724#msg893724

Online RedKettle

Makes this review seem a bit sick in the circumstances. Each to their own but slapping about a Parkinson's patient isn't my idea of fun.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=70556.msg893724#msg893724

Careful there - that reviewer is an old mate of many of us, although no longer with us on UKP.   Clearly she was not showing any signs of Parkinson's or whatever at the time R saw her and she was fully consenting to what they got up to. 

Your review is useful but we do not tend to appreciate having a go at fellow punters here.

Careful there - that reviewer is an old mate of many of us, although no longer with us on UKP.   Clearly she was not showing any signs of Parkinson's or whatever at the time R saw her and she was fully consenting to what they got up to. 

Your review is useful but we do not tend to appreciate having a go at fellow punters here.

Yes, but there was a previous review showing she did have problems long before and given the advanced degenerative state there is no way this wasn't significantly noticeable. I tend not to appreciate fellow punters writing reviews with rose tinted goggles but there you go, it cost me wasted time and effort. Whether she was fully consenting or not isn't the point really is it!  Why not make a booking and provide your own opinion as to whether she could possibly have been Parkinson's free 7-8 months ago. Ignore my review and go and see her off the back of her last positive on here and then feel free to wax lyrical about what a wonderful and accurate positive review it was!  :hi:  He'd no longer be an "old mate" if you'd visited her based on that review!
« Last Edit: July 07, 2016, 02:15:21 PM by Ted Clubberlang »

Clearly she was not showing any signs of Parkinson's or whatever at the time R saw her

Review from two years previously and R's review was 7-8 months before I saw her and walked.

I have to say that I noticed a small neurological problem with Cheryl this time round, she has quite a pronounced tremour in her right hand, (think Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan)  it was something that I thought I noticed last time but wasn't 100% sure of.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2016, 02:09:49 PM by Ted Clubberlang »

Offline CoolTiger

Ted,
Not defending timmy, but you are assuming that HE WOULD HAVE READ Roland D Hay's review, and noted the comment about the tremor in her right hand.

Ted,
Not defending timmy, but you are assuming that HE WOULD HAVE READ Roland D Hay's review, and noted the comment about the tremor in her right hand.

Not at all, I am simply making the point that it was noticeable 2 years ago, is at an advanced stage now, so therefore must have been noticeable to anybody seeing her 7-8 months ago. Whether he read RDH's review is immaterial, he never mentioned it in his.

Offline pictisunum

Makes this review seem a bit sick in the circumstances. Each to their own but slapping about a Parkinson's patient isn't my idea of fun.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=70556.msg893724#msg893724
Sorry to hear that you had this uncomfortable experience. However our friend was an ethical / decent punter and an accurate / reliable reviewer (obvious if you read his body of work).

I've no idea about this WG's tremors or the validity of your "diagnosis". There are several potential explanations for her presentation and possible variation / fluctuation within this eg variable compliance with medication resulting in worsening of symptoms if it's a medical condition, etc.

It's something that she should forewarn punters about though.  In your position I'd be inclined to email her with that feedback.

Online RedKettle

Yes, but there was a previous review showing she did have problems long before and given the advanced degenerative state there is no way this wasn't significantly noticeable. I tend not to appreciate fellow punters writing reviews with rose tinted goggles but there you go, it cost me wasted time and effort. Whether she was fully consenting or not isn't the point really is it!  Why not make a booking and provide your own opinion as to whether she could possibly have been Parkinson's free 7-8 months ago. Ignore my review and go and see her off the back of her last positive on here and then feel free to wax lyrical about what a wonderful and accurate positive review it was!  :hi:  He'd no longer be an "old mate" if you'd visited her based on that review!

I am not doubting your review and as stated had removed her from my HL because of it.  I also do not doubt the other review that you refer to given that I know the reviewer pretty well, especially as we had both shagged some of the same girls.  I have no doubt at all that if she had been like you reported at the time that he saw her then he would have reported that in his review - indeed I suspect that like you he would have walked.  Your are entitled to your view but equally I am entitled to state my view that I believe the original review would be accurate, that the reviewer would not have acted distastefully in the way that you suggest (although he did in several other ways  :D) and that I do not appreciate you making those sorts of comments about him.

Sorry to hear that you had this uncomfortable experience. However our friend was an ethical / decent punter and an accurate / reliable reviewer (obvious if you read his body of work).

Maybe, but nobody's perfect are they and I'm confident that the review under discussion was a lie by omission rather than suggesting that any other portion of his review was inaccurate. Maybe he didn't see it as being important, maybe he was too embarrassed to mention it. We'll never know.

I've no idea about this WG's tremors or the validity of your "diagnosis".

A good point, and neither have I. My "diagnosis" may be wrong, but I've seen Parkinson's patients before and am familiar with the signs; however, my description of the visual signs of her illness is highly accurate but if you feel that "validity of diagnosis" is the critical piece of information here then perhaps you should email her, because I have no interest in doing so.

Offline CoolTiger

I am not doubting your review and as stated had removed her from my HL because of it.  I also do not doubt the other review that you refer to given that I know the reviewer pretty well, especially as we had both shagged some of the same girls.  I have no doubt at all that if she had been like you reported at the time that he saw her then he would have reported that in his review - indeed I suspect that like you he would have walked.  Your are entitled to your view but equally I am entitled to state my view that I believe the original review would be accurate, that the reviewer would not have acted distastefully in the way that you suggest (although he did in several other ways  :D) and that I do not appreciate you making those sorts of comments about him.

How can we forget that?  :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am not doubting your review and as stated had removed her from my HL because of it.  I also do not doubt the other review that you refer to given that I know the reviewer pretty well, especially as we had both shagged some of the same girls.  I have no doubt at all that if she had been like you reported at the time that he saw her then he would have reported that in his review - indeed I suspect that like you he would have walked.  Your are entitled to your view but equally I am entitled to state my view that I believe the original review would be accurate, that the reviewer would not have acted distastefully in the way that you suggest (although he did in several other ways  :D) and that I do not appreciate you making those sorts of comments about him.

Don't "appreciate" it all you like but the chances are that I've saved you from one of the worst experiences you'll ever encounter. You feel it more important to jump to someones defence over the validity of his review when the fact is that you don't know and the evidence suggests his review wasn't fully accurate. You can't have it both ways, put her back on your HL if you choose to believe she was fine 7-8 months ago because by your conclusion, it may well be just an episode and she may get well again and give you a great punt! Have the courage of your conviction then come back and tell us he was right all along!
 Are you really suggesting she got well from two years ago, then had a massive worsening of her conditions over the last 8 months, to the point where she can barely dress herself, just after her last review from R? Specifically, what sort of comments don't you appreciate? That in my opinion he slapped someone around with Parkinsons? The thing is, as you rightly pointed out, it was consensual and maybe they both loved it but the simple point I made was that it is not my idea of fun. As I said earlier, if you personally are ok with this then get yourself booked in. What is "distasteful" is a matter of opinion; I'm confident she had signs of illness when he saw her and personally, rough sex of the sort discussed, is distasteful to me, particularly when engaging with someone with such obvious signs of this sort of illness.

Offline pictisunum

Maybe, but nobody's perfect are they and I'm confident that the review under discussion was a lie by omission rather than suggesting that any other portion of his review was inaccurate. Maybe he didn't see it as being important, maybe he was too embarrassed to mention it. We'll never know.

A good point, and neither have I. My "diagnosis" may be wrong, but I've seen Parkinson's patients before and am familiar with the signs; however, my description of the visual signs of her illness is highly accurate but if you feel that "validity of diagnosis" is the critical piece of information here then perhaps you should email her, because I have no interest in doing so.
No the point of my post was that her presentation or symptoms may fluctuate, and I gave a potential example. So she could've presented in various ways at different times. I've no reason to doubt your review, but even less reason to doubt R's review. Like I said, sorry you had an uncomfortable experience.

I've never been in contact with her so it would be very weird for me to email her. However you could offer feedback on why you walked, although you're obviously not obligated to do so.

No the point of my post was that her presentation or symptoms may fluctuate, and I gave a potential example. So she could've presented in various ways at different times.

You're entirely right of course, but based on what I saw, I would not want to be the punter hoping to catch her on a good day, would you? Jesus, maybe I did catch her on a good day! To my mind her condition is clearly uncontrollable or why would she have not medicated herself before accepting a booking, if indeed it was possible to medicate herself?  I know she drove to the hotel so she's a danger both to herself and to others because in my opinion she shouldn't even be driving.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2016, 06:41:53 PM by Ted Clubberlang »

Offline pictisunum

You're entirely right of course, but based on what I saw, I would not want to be the punter hoping to catch her on a good day, would you? Jesus, maybe I did catch her on a good day! To my mind her condition is clearly uncontrollable or why would she have not medicated herself before accepting a booking, if indeed it was possible to medicate herself?  I know she drove to the hotel so she's a danger both to herself and to others because in my opinion she shouldn't even be driving.
I had no interest in meeting her anyway, but your review does nothing to increase her appeal.

It's not punting related but if you think her driving is comprised to the extent of endangering others, you might feel an obligation to report that (although if she has a neurological condition her GP should have done this already).

Online RedKettle

if you re read the other review he starts it by saying he is catching up on past girls - this punt could have been a year or two before he wrote the review - perhaps check facts before throwing mud at fellow punters!!

Online RedKettle

Don't "appreciate" it all you like but the chances are that I've saved you from one of the worst experiences you'll ever encounter. You feel it more important to jump to someones defence over the validity of his review when the fact is that you don't know and the evidence suggests his review wasn't fully accurate. You can't have it both ways, put her back on your HL if you choose to believe she was fine 7-8 months ago because by your conclusion, it may well be just an episode and she may get well again and give you a great punt! Have the courage of your conviction then come back and tell us he was right all along!
 Are you really suggesting she got well from two years ago, then had a massive worsening of her conditions over the last 8 months, to the point where she can barely dress herself, just after her last review from R? Specifically, what sort of comments don't you appreciate? That in my opinion he slapped someone around with Parkinsons? The thing is, as you rightly pointed out, it was consensual and maybe they both loved it but the simple point I made was that it is not my idea of fun. As I said earlier, if you personally are ok with this then get yourself booked in. What is "distasteful" is a matter of opinion; I'm confident she had signs of illness when he saw her and personally, rough sex of the sort discussed, is distasteful to me, particularly when engaging with someone with such obvious signs of this sort of illness.

you logic is crazy - I have said that I completely accept your review, hence off the HL (although as she had been on that for years and I had never seen it is unlikely I would have.)

I am solely defending the integrity of the earlier review - I am not a doctor and I have no idea what is actually wrong with her, neither do you, so there is no way you can state with any authority what condition she was in when R saw her.

Also see my post above - a more careful read of the start of the review suggests your assumption on timing could be years out.




Latest videos on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

Latest images on UKEscorting.com (free site!)