Author Topic: Laurenjamesxoxo - Salford, Manchester  (Read 2158 times)


1 review(s) for Laurenjamesxoxo (0 positive, 1 neutral, 0 negative) [Indexed by NigelF]

Offline NigelF

Link: External Link/Members Only

Price: £50 for 30 mins (including DFK, OWO, deepthroating and sex). This price included a £10 discount due an offer on her profile for members of auto-censored (edit: the other North West site) throughout the month of September. Naturally, I didn’t mention UKP. I did actually join the auto-censored very recently (not because of her) but I haven’t posted at all (and indeed I didn’t offer to and she didn’t ask me). The owner of that site is a very dodgy pimp and is openly against punters (he thinks two wrongs make a right – see the “news” about discussing private lives), the site has vested interests (due to adverts and the owner being a pimp), seems very fluffy and is pretty dead now anyway.

If you look on there, Lauren is a member (she is here too actually) and over there she had many forum members fawning over her. Yet in all that time there’s not a single review about her. To be fair much of that time she was outcall only but she’s been doing incalls now for a good number of weeks so it’s still rather telling that her first review is on here.

Location: House in M6 between Salford Royal Hospital and the Tesco Extra in Salford. There was plenty of on-street parking (or at least there was during the weekday daytime). The house itself was perfectly fine, as was the shower and bed.

Looks: She’s actually very recently uploaded some pics that I think are even more misleading than the ones which were up when I saw her. The photos in her gallery which show her stomach are not accurate. They’re either old or she’s sucking her gut in (possibly both). It’s probably the latter though because otherwise it’s surprising she’s uploaded the new pics so recently (as that suggests they aren’t old).
At any rate, she has a large stomach and is generally a fairly big unit. I don’t mind that much but it was definitely not what I was expecting or wanting on this occasion. There's no chance she’s a size 12. She’s definitely around a size 16. Perhaps there's a fairly small chance she is actually a size 14 due to her short height.

Facially, she was disappointing and didn’t look that great. I do think her stated age of 32 seems accurate (I’d say early-mid 30s). Despite her pictures, her tits are actually disappointingly small compared to the rest of her, particularly her stomach. She has a big arse, which is actually fairly well represented in some of her pics. Overall, disappointing and not what I expected from her pics.

Service: Excellent DFK and plenty of it. Very good OWO with plenty of deepthroating too (despite me not asking). She did seem to be at her limit with me (I’m an average size) as she gagged a few times but she got all the way down and I definitely commend her for her great effort. Very enthusiastic sex in a variety of positions.

Overall: Great service and attitude. Let down by her misleading pics and below-average looks.

I enjoyed myself to be honest but I doubt I’d return on the basis that I can find similarly sized girls with similar service but better looks (i.e. tits and face). English Harriet springs to mind.

This is a harsh review but it’s honest and it’s as accurate as possible. It is simply unacceptable for her pics to be so misleading. It’s not an absolutely huge margin but it is very noticeable. As such, while she was a good shag, she was a bit disappointing, hence the neutral. Nonetheless, with Tontober around the corner, she is a good potential candidate if you're fine with the caveats above.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 11:41:34 pm by NigelF »

Offline NigelF

An update to this review: she's now substantially changed her profile.

She now has a face pic front and centre (she had absolutely none before). She used to say she was a size 12, now she says she's 14 (which as I said in my review could well be true) and she now has many pics showing her stomach. They're a lot more accurate than her previous photos. I'm not entirely convinced she's not sucking in her stomach a little and I do think her bra makes her tits look better than they are (although I suppose that's pretty obvious), nonetheless they may well be totally accurate and I might be being harsh/my memory might be failing me.

As such, this neutral review obviously still stands (as an accurate reflection of the past) but if I were judging her now, she'd definitely get a positive.

Offline cueball

Choose enough to bang into the tontober thread Nigel, put a link in pal, it keeps the regional thread bubbling along nicely

Offline NigelF

Choose enough to bang into the tontober thread Nigel, put a link in pal, it keeps the regional thread bubbling along nicely

She's actually already been mentioned by someone else and then me. I've mentioned her again just now as well. £50/90 is a very good deal.

Offline SalfordSam

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Banned
  • Banned
  • *
  • Posts: 148
  • Likes: 2
  •  
  • Reviews: 16
Do you know if CIM was an option?
And more than 1 pop in 30 mins too?

Asking for a friend.......  :D
Banned reason: Needs to review
Banned by: Iloveoral

Offline NigelF

Do you know if CIM was an option?
And more than 1 pop in 30 mins too?

Asking for a friend.......  :D

Her profile does say her rates are inclusive of everything on her likes lists (except for 15 mins) but she might exclude her "reduced rates" although she doesn't say that (so I'd be annoyed if she did). CIM is on her likes list and I got the impression she'd be fine with it but I definitely can't confirm that as I didn't partake. It's obviously something to ask her beforehand.

Unfortunately I don't know about more than 1 pop either (although my impression would be positive). Again, it's something to confirm with her. I can't even cum twice in an hour  :(
« Last Edit: October 11, 2017, 11:57:57 pm by NigelF »

Offline Clitheroelad

I think pics 4 and 5 in her gallery give the game away. The rest dont look too bad tbh.

Good report and thanks for the info.

Offline NigelF

I think pics 4 and 5 in her gallery give the game away. The rest dont look too bad tbh.

Good report and thanks for the info.

Yes, they're the new ones. She's even uploaded some more now since yesterday (particularly face pics). I think I've been a little generous with her regarding the accuracy of her new photos and I think they're still cheeky/a bit misleading. There's such a mix of pictures in her gallery I'm going put some of them up here in two categories: representative and non-representative. I'll just include some of the ones on the first page of her gallery, not the second page (except for a couple).

First off though, how the hell do I upload multiple pictures in one post, i.e. where it says attach image(s) how do I get it to select more than one file? I only recently figured out how to do one (it's annoying it doesn't show up in the post preview) and frankly I'm a technophobic old man so I need some help please!
« Last Edit: October 12, 2017, 02:41:57 pm by NigelF »

Offline NigelF

I've been helpfully informed by another another member that it's probably the file size limit that prevents multiple pics in one post. Since I can't really be arsed to post more and because she just texted me asking me not to (although she was just referring to the face pics - which she's now taken down and apparently put in her PG) - I'll not bother putting any up. If you do pay for the PG, I think one of those pics is rather out of date but it should be pretty obvious.

As for the body shots, take your pick whichever you think is the "worst" and assume that's the most representative. If you're interested in seeing her - I'd recommend you do so and then do your own review.

I should add though, I think she's out of order with her unsolicited text to me, especially since we'd arranged via AW and she didn't bother messaging me through there. In addition to that, soon after we met I accidentally sent her a text which was intended for another WG - however she wasn't to know that and it probably came across like a personal text (I just apologised and said it was the wrong person). Given that would have suggested it's my personal phone number (even though it isn't) it's even more out of order to have texted me, as who knows who could have seen it etc.

Offline NigelF

Having said that, given my posts on here, it's quite obvious that I don't use my personal number for punting. Also, given my texts to her, she would have been almost certain I was NigelF because apparently I was the only person to ask for the "other north west site" discount! I knew that was quite revealing and was tempted not to include it but I couldn't resist being honest about the price I paid and having a dig at that site!

I'll stop the running commentary now, it's all rather boring.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2017, 06:30:38 pm by NigelF »

Offline lewisjones23

is she banned from here?

is obviously reading the thread

text is out of order being out the blue

Offline NigelF

is she banned from here?

is obviously reading the thread

text is out of order being out the blue

I don't know but I doubt she's banned because there's been little mention of her before this review. Actually, I've just had a look now and that's not quite true but I don't think there's anything she would have kicked off about. I have no idea how she's reading the thread as I thought this was her profile on here but she's not logged in since June: https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?action=profile;u=92080

She probably has another account (which is bad form) but it's also definitely possible that it's just a white knight/fluffy relaying information to her. I had a look on the "other site" out of interest and I don't think it's anyone from there.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2017, 06:54:42 pm by NigelF »

Offline Titi

Thanks for the review Nigel. She’s now on UKE.