I was only kidding when I said this would still be going at Christmas, but maybe it will

But it should not need to. It seems pretty clear-cut to me.
1. Punter posted a negative review of a popular girl saying she had hygiene issues.
2. Girl comes back to this saying booking never even happened. She asked the punter to provide some info like what tattoos are on her back or what colour were the bedsheets etc.
3. Punter refuses to give her this info saying he cannot remember them. And the punter doesn't have to give her this info.
5. That should be the end of it.
6. If the punter comes along posting reviews for other girls in the future who she then comes along and claims that booking never even took place. Then this review would need to be relooked at then.
7. If the girl gets further reviews suggesting the same things; i.e hygiene issues. Then once again this review would need to be relooked at then with this in mind.
8. In the meantime take it or leave it. It wasn't that bad of a review. And from what I understand girls can easily get BV and not know about it and not do nothing to cause it. It wasn't that big of a deal. It was not that bad of a review.
9. In the arguments of who is telling the truth, punters post quotes of her own posts on UKE showing she claims herself she is close pals with the north east local gangland community, has a rage filled type temper and works for the NHS as a counsellor. And yet she has two stalkers (who must obviously have a serious death wish about them).
10. What more is there. Other than she is friends with Mia/Ms Maddison who is a complete and utter bitch who likes to out people.