Author Topic: TS Miss Rachel Moore in Notting Hill  (Read 23884 times)


2 review(s) for Rachel Amour (1 positive, 0 neutral, 1 negative) [Indexed by Dark_Gable]

Offline A Decent Fist

Please note that this is a review of a TS escort.

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

The set-up:

This was a Plan C that turned out rather well. A TOFTT punt, too, as Rachel has no previous UKP reviews or even mentions on here.

I'd decided I wanted a versatile session with a TS with a good-sized cock and Plan A was with the glamorous Angelina Angie, previously reviewed here:

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?msg=2574276

For me it had to be daytime and after a phone call and a couple of follow-up texts it became apparent that on this day at least, Angie wouldn't be starting work until 5pm, which was impossible for me.

Plan B was the statuesque Chrystal Lola, who has not been reviewed on here, but who did make a controversial contribution to this thread last year:

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?msg=2264499

I'd had her in mind ever since, but even though her green light was on she didn't answer the phone when I rang at 12.30pm, only 90 minutes before my preferred time.

I was about to give up when I noticed on my Birchplace dashboard that Rachel Moore had just popped up in Notting Hill. She's English and I'd previously noticed her when she was listed in Leeds. After a quick scan of her pics and profile on BP and on Adultwork I called her and the whole thing was very easily arranged with two more texts.

The venue:

Small flat on the fifth (I think) floor of a converted town house about three minutes on foot from Notting Hill Gate station. I'd punted a Venezuelan TS at a house almost exactly opposite about two years before. No lift in the building and steep stairs so I took them very slowly. The flat when I got inside was cluttered and untidy but seemed clean and it had a good-sized double bed to play on. I didn't take a shower because I'd had one at home 45 minutes earlier and I'm not a sweaty boy.

The girl:

Rachel looks just like her pictures except for having slightly longer hair which makes her look even more feminine. She has the aura and persona of a female, though I think if she sat opposite you on the Tube you might just suspect she could be trans. In medium heels she was about an inch taller than me (I'm 6ft 1ins) but slender as slender can be. She wore hold-up stockings and a little black dress. When it came off it revealed that she has a cute little girlie bum and the tiniest of bee-sting tits. Just soft bumps behind her nipples. Female or shemale, that's the kind of physique that turns me on. She was very friendly and down to earth with a soft northern accent. She was passive in the sense that she didn't take the lead at any point (I prefer girls who do) but active in terms of drilling me with her cock when I asked her to.

The services:

DFK, fondling and groping, face-fucking (her on me), rimming (me on her), OWO, 69, her fucking me in two positions but not managing a third, me failing to fuck her in any position, more OWO, more 69, frottage/wanking to completion. She didn't cum.

The action:

At my request Rachel stayed fully clothed for a while after I got naked and once she'd got me hard while we were standing, kissing and groping we moved to the bed for the same thing but horizontal. Next I asked her to straddle my chest and fuck my face. Her cock at this point was flaccid and about four inches long and after five minutes of my oral worship it had barely changed. I mentioned this and she said not to worry, it takes her a long time but she does get hard. This proved to be correct. I estimate that when erect it was more like six and a bit inches than the seven claimed on her profile but it was quite fat along its full length. Overall, a little bit bigger than mine.

I got her to sit on my face while I rimmed and wanked her (she took her heels off at this point and the rest of her outfit came off gradually). At this point I noticed that she had no ball sack and barely any testicles. Possibly undescended but I never asked. Next we switched to 69 with her on top and this was when she began to get hard, finally. I'd describe her oral technique as soft and light with her mouth staying a bit more open than I would have liked, but she had no problem with me thrusting into it quite forcefully from below.

Normally in a versatile booking I like to top the girl first because my erection never gets back to full mast after I've had a cock up my bum, even with a blue pill. But I thought that hers might be temperamental, too, and I wanted her to top me more than vice-versa. So once she was fully erect I got her to put on a condom, lube us both up and take me doggie-style, me on the edge of the bed and her standing up.

She slid inside me with not the faintest tinge of pain, but then I do keep my arse well-trained with dildos. I think Angelina or Lola's meatier tools would have been more of a challenge. I told Rachel to be as rough as she liked but she really doesn't have the physique for that, so although she did pound a bit harder and faster it was all very light and almost delicate. It was a delicious sensation but I could tell that a prostate orgasm wasn't on the cards.

I got her to switch to missionary with my legs over her shoulders in the hope that this might hit the spot. It felt even better, but again that elusive button inside wasn't being hit in the right way. I did love the way her hair fell all around my face while she was fucking me in this position and her nipples got very hard as I alternately squeezed and caressed them.

After a while I asked her to do me sideways in spoons but she'd lost full hardness by now. I gave her some oral attention after she whipped off the condom and this improved matters, but she couldn't get inside me again. So I got her to thrust into my bum cleft while I wanked myself to something like an erection. On with the condom and she climbed on top for me to fuck her in cowgirl, but I just wasn't hard enough to get inside.

Back to 69 then, and with her ass lubed I fingered her very deeply at the same time. Finally we lay face to face kissing while I rubbed our cocks together. Rachel had said earlier than she can sometimes cum, but only in small amounts, if she wanks herself a certain way, but at this stage she said it wasn't going to work. I could feel my own climax building anyway so I asked if she was OK with me spurting over her with our cocks together and she was.

But then... minor disaster. My phone rang. Not my punting phone, my regular phone. I'd forgotten to turn the fucking thing off. I knew there was a strong chance it was my girlfriend (it was, I saw later) and the distraction of thinking what I would say if she asked why I hadn't answered meant that suddenly I was spurting spunk without the slightest sensation of pleasure. Damn.

For me it rather killed what had been a very intense and erotic mood, so I got up and cleaned myself up with wet wipes and at the bathroom sink. We had been at it for 55 minutes and it was a very enjoyable time until that blasted phone call. Although she never took the initiative, Rachel went along with everything I asked for and was very eager to please.

She's off to Paris for about 10 days on Tuesday of this week and will be coming back to London, not Leeds, afterwards, if she tickles your fancy.

Offline winkywanky

Good review as ever ADF.

Shame about the ruined orgasm, it's happened to me once or twice over the years (and probably to others)...it's strange how being distracted at the crucial moment can do this - the 'physical' side occurs but it's kind of detached from the pleasure side. Orgasms are very complicated things, a heady and mysterious mix of mind and body, and I'm not sure if even the medical profession fully understand them.

Offline LNDNman

Nice review OP. Made me laugh a bit... just the way you write  :lol: :lol:

Anyway, think she may be a bit too masculine for me.

Also don’t like the sound no ball bag. Makes me think of those poor little male dogs that get taken to the vets.


Offline A Decent Fist

In the interests of balance, I am going to quote from two personal messages which another UKP member, whom I will not identify, sent me after he met Rachel Moore recently ... to a large extent because of my positive review.

I told him he should write his own negative review but he would not, with the following (to me, absurdly paranoid) explanation: "I rarely leave reviews these days as I do not want to leave a trail of my punting habits for personal reasons."

For "rarely" read "never", at least in his current UKP identity. Anyway, this is what he told me:

Quote
Nowhere near as attractive as in her photos. I expected to meet a young girl with a smooth and sexy body. Instead I was faced with a bloke with sagging skin and stretch marks on her bum cheeks.

She is very polite and had made a lot of effort to prepare herself so I did not have the heart to walk off. I did the minimum and finished myself off and left. 

I do not mind TVs but the ones I like are generally much younger, fit and feminine. For me she falls in the bloke in wig category… too masculine, specially facially, but also … a strong and trained upper body.

So there you have it. Maybe I shouldn't pass on the opinions of someone without the balls to write his own review, but having given Rachel a positive I thought it would be useful to other punters to see such a strongly divergent view.

I found her attractive... but bear in mind that I'm an occasional cross-dresser who regularly fucks (and gets fucked by) all kinds of CDs and TVs. As ever, YMMV.

Offline winkywanky

Thanks ADF, and I think you were quite right to pass on this "anonymous punter's" experience for everyone to read and to make of what they will.

And if the anonymous punter is reading this, please have the balls to write reviews, otherwise your presence here is simply taking and not giving. NOT cool, when you use reviews by others to make your punting choices, without returning the favour.

Offline mark22

As I'm considering making a booking with this SP thought I'd reach out to the forum to see if anyone has anything to add to the one and only review available.

Many thanks and all comments are most welcome  :hi:

Offline mark22

External Link/Members Only

Forgot to mention the slight change of name and in Leeds now at least some of the time.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2021, 02:13:24 pm by mark22 »

Offline Voyager

Nowhere near as attractive as in her photos. I expected to meet a young girl with a smooth and sexy body. Instead I was faced with a bloke with sagging skin and stretch marks on her bum cheeks.

She is very polite and had made a lot of effort to prepare herself so I did not have the heart to walk off. I did the minimum and finished myself off and left.

I do not mind TVs but the ones I like are generally much younger, fit and feminine. For me she falls in the bloke in wig category… too masculine, specially facially, but also … a strong and trained upper body.

Offline A Decent Fist

Nowhere near as attractive as in her photos. I expected to meet a young girl with a smooth and sexy body. Instead I was faced with a bloke with sagging skin and stretch marks on her bum cheeks.

She is very polite and had made a lot of effort to prepare herself so I did not have the heart to walk off. I did the minimum and finished myself off and left.

I do not mind TVs but the ones I like are generally much younger, fit and feminine. For me she falls in the bloke in wig category… too masculine, specially facially, but also … a strong and trained upper body.

It's a bit weird of you to copy and paste the words from the private message you sent me two years ago with your differing assessment of Rachel when I had posted the very same sentences into this thread (see above) in the interests of balance. Had you not seen that, or did you just presume that the person asking about her today had not seen them?
« Last Edit: November 08, 2021, 05:37:44 pm by A Decent Fist »

Offline Voyager

How seriously weird of you to copy and paste the words from the private message you sent me two years ago with your very differing assessment of Rachel.

Are you not aware that I copied and pasted those same sentences into this thread in the interests of balance (see above)? Or do you just want to claim ownership of the opinion now?

Stop talking rubbish.  I originally emailed you with my feedback as I did not want to post here for personal reasons which no longer applies.  You decided to post my email regardless, providing some stupid commentary.  I have now reinstated what I said personally so that you do not have to add your weird interpretation of things.

Rachel is a nice person but you must live in a world of fantasy to think that she looks the same as in her photos and describe her in the way you have.  I followed your recommendation and ended up disappointed as your description of her was totally misleading.  So I am posting my feedback personally so anyone wanting confirmation can ask me directly rather than depend on the rantings of a fantasist.

Offline A Decent Fist

Quote
Rant /rant/ verb: speak or shout at length in an angry, impassioned way.

It ain't me doing the ranting.

Offline mark22

Stop talking rubbish.  I originally emailed you with my feedback as I did not want to post here for personal reasons which no longer applies.  You decided to post my email regardless, providing some stupid commentary.  I have now reinstated what I said personally so that you do not have to add your weird interpretation of things.

Rachel is a nice person but you must live in a world of fantasy to think that she looks the same as in her photos and describe her in the way you have.  I followed your recommendation and ended up disappointed as your description of her was totally misleading.  So I am posting my feedback personally so anyone wanting confirmation can ask me directly rather than depend on the rantings of a fantasist.
Many thanks for your views on Rachel, they are much appreciated. Obviously I had read the comments from the PM but there's nothing better than hearing things directly from the horses mouth, so to speak.

I'm still undecided as whether to go ahead and make a booking but at the moment I'm leaning towards looking elsewhere.

Offline mark22

In the interests of balance, I am going to quote from two personal messages which another UKP member, whom I will not identify, sent me after he met Rachel Moore recently ... to a large extent because of my positive review.

I told him he should write his own negative review but he would not, with the following (to me, absurdly paranoid) explanation: "I rarely leave reviews these days as I do not want to leave a trail of my punting habits for personal reasons."

For "rarely" read "never", at least in his current UKP identity. Anyway, this is what he told me:

So there you have it. Maybe I shouldn't pass on the opinions of someone without the balls to write his own review, but having given Rachel a positive I thought it would be useful to other punters to see such a strongly divergent view.

I found her attractive... but bear in mind that I'm an occasional cross-dresser who regularly fucks (and gets fucked by) all kinds of CDs and TVs. As ever, YMMV.

Many thanks for your review and further comments, without which there would be absolutely nothing to go on regarding this girl.

Very much appreciated  :hi:

Offline candycan

Nowhere near as attractive as in her photos. I expected to meet a young girl with a smooth and sexy body. Instead I was faced with a bloke with sagging skin and stretch marks on her bum cheeks.

She is very polite and had made a lot of effort to prepare herself so I did not have the heart to walk off. I did the minimum and finished myself off and left.

I do not mind TVs but the ones I like are generally much younger, fit and feminine. For me she falls in the bloke in wig category… too masculine, specially facially, but also … a strong and trained upper body.

I was tempted to go and see her quite a while ago myself. During my research I stumbled across a youtube channel of hers with a bunch of videos that are only a couple of years old and I very much agree she looks nowhere near as good as her current photos etc. Very much a bloke in the wig as you describe, I was really put off and did not go to see her and was glad I did not.



External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

Going by the username rachelmore1984 I am guessing she is way older than she portrays, you would think she is in her early 20's by the pictures but is likely in her late 30's if she was born in 1984.



Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only
« Last Edit: November 18, 2021, 09:00:47 am by candycan »

Offline Voyager

I was tempted to go and see her quite a while ago myself. During my research I stumbled across a youtube channel of hers with a bunch of videos that are only a couple of years old and I very much agree she looks nowhere near as good as her current photos etc. Very much a bloke in the wig as you describe, I was really put off and did not go to see her and was glad I did not.



External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

Going by the username rachelmore1984 I am guessing she is way older than she portrays, you would think she is in her early 20's by the pictures but is likely in her late 30's if she was born in 1984.



Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only

I was harsh in my reference (bloke in wig) as I was very annoyed at the time..  To be fair, she is someone who seems genuinely into being a TV and pays a lot of attention to her looks.    It is just that the reality is different to the photos.

Offline candycan

I was harsh in my reference (bloke in wig) as I was very annoyed at the time..  To be fair, she is someone who seems genuinely into being a TV and pays a lot of attention to her looks.    It is just that the reality is different to the photos.

Sure I am not knocking her commitment or anything like that and I am sure she is a nice person. However if you visited her expecting someone who looks like her profile and were greeted with the person in the youtube videos you would rightly be annoyed. Your initial reaction of being annoyed was justified in my opinion. Sure nobody looks exactly like their pics but there is a point where the pics they are selling themselves on are just misleading.

Offline Voyager

Sure I am not knocking her commitment or anything like that and I am sure she is a nice person. However if you visited her expecting someone who looks like her profile and were greeted with the person in the youtube videos you would rightly be annoyed. Your initial reaction of being annoyed was justified in my opinion. Sure nobody looks exactly like their pics but there is a point where the pics they are selling themselves on are just misleading.

Totally agree.

Offline mark22

Thanks for the links to the you tube vids.

Rachel seems a nice girl and she did talk of having surgery in one of them so maybe that's a reason for change in apperance ? To be honest if her charges were a bit lower, say around £120 ph then I'd probably give her a visit but £160 is a little too expensive I feel.

Offline LNDNman

Recently saw Rachel. Not for me, don’t think the bloke in a wig suggest regarding looks is too far off… albeit skinny.
Made horrible manly grunting noises whilst fucking. Definitely a negative for me. Will do a review when I get a bit extra time.

Offline A Decent Fist

In case anyone else is interested, Rachel now has a video on her Twitter profile. Nothing erotic . . . she just strolls round a shopping mall in a dress and heels.

External Link/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only

Offline killerbees

In case anyone else is interested, Rachel now has a video on her Twitter profile. Nothing erotic . . . she just strolls round a shopping mall in a dress and heels.

External Link/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only

You are really trying to keep this well over 2 years old review alive.

Offline A Decent Fist

You are really trying to keep this well over 2 years old review alive.

Nope. Other people resurrected it long after I had almost forgotten about it.

Motive for the posting the above clip? Found it, thought it added to the debate about her looks, convincingness etc. That's all.

Offline mark22


Offline LNDNman

She ain’t convincing anyone in person