Author Topic: MiamiChick - Northfields  (Read 1350 times)


14 review(s) for Slim-Poppy (8 positive, 5 neutral, 1 negative) [Indexed by ]

Offline Elziver

Alright guys, my first review. Short one for now but will be posting more later.

External Link/Members Only

Comms set up by text. Made an outfit request (casual with boots) and she agreed. On my way there, she asked if she could delay the meet by 20 minutes (Had no problem with this, but just something for you to keep in mind should you book her).

When I got all the way to her place in Northfields (a 50 minute trip for me), she greeted me in a robe. When asked about the outfit, she said "Oh my friend was using my phone. I don't have anything like that". Naturally, I walked while lamenting the nearly two wasted hours I'm never getting back.  :dash:

Her place is dark, dingy, and very likely a shared apartment as I definitely felt the presence of others.

Offline Apu

So you left because she didn't wear casual clothing and some boots?

You wasted 2 hours to walk away based on that..

If it was a gimp suit yeah...
Banned reason: Undesirable perverted fantasist
Banned by: daviemac

Offline Rifte

Did she look at all like her profile pictures on AW?

Because she looks fucking smoking hot.

Offline dubhcarr

Thanks for the review and warning OP..on my radar but seems a bit flakey......

Online Moneyd

Ok so you walked because of a basic outfit request.

Not sure that warrants a negative but that’s up to you.

For the record I’ve been to see her 3 times and she’s an amazing punt!

The apartment is not dark and dingy either. It’s a modernised flat with very nice shower facilities.

I understand your frustration but would recommend readers to take this with a pinch of salt and keep in mind her other reviews so you can actually get an idea of actually taking the punt.

I’m not White Knighting here. I just think a negative review based on a wasted hour commute over an outfit seems like a bit of an angry reaction to something that’s not that big of a deal.

Offline Elziver

Facially I'd give her a 6/10. Kinda looked like she had just rolled out of bed.

It's not just the outfit thing although that is up there. I would have been willing to wait for her to wear it, but she (or her "friend" rather) said she'd wear it when I texted and didn't even have it at all when I showed up. The deception is what put me off. I hate it when someone says yes to everything prior to the meet only to find out that is not the case when you finally show up. It's very similar to a girl putting things on her "Likes" list only to later say "I don't do this or that".

Online Moneyd

I wouldn’t compare it to a WG telling lies on her likes list. But I take your point and respect your opinion.

Facially I think 7/8 out of 10.

Amazing tits. Amazing body. Great fuck.

Online JonasG

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,264
  • Likes: 64
  •  
  • Reviews: 135
I've been to these flats as well to see other WGs and definitely not dark and dingy.

They're modern and pretty nice tbh.

Offline SomTumFucker

Complete over reaction which says nothing about the SP and everything about the OP. Calibrate your expectations or you’ll be doing more walking than jizzing as a punter.

Offline hw189

I suspect this person is a tout. This review which doesn't seem credible, and his other published review on Amelia today (which coincidentally reads like an advert rather than a review), just seem like an elaborate setup to make him seem like a credible punter.


Offline SomTumFucker

I suspect this person is a tout. This review which doesn't seem credible, and his other published review on Amelia today (which coincidentally reads like an advert rather than a review), just seem like an elaborate setup to make him seem like a credible punter.

Good call - other review is fluffy BS with no mention of a clothing fetish. Just dissing another SP to gain credibility. Bad Sergei!   :lol:

Online JonasG

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,264
  • Likes: 64
  •  
  • Reviews: 135
His description of the flat couldn't be more wrong, so something's definitely up here.