Tatti Gloucester rd

[king tarzan]

External Link/Members Only


Extremely sexy beautiful looking I would say at least 35+
Kissing was issue as minimum bollox...
Promised me owo out of this world

Politely told her to fuck off...

Nice natured hottie..

[Raven]

Did you do the £20 kiss test? 

[king tarzan]

Did you do the £20 kiss test? 

What's the point when she's saying minimum and hardly any tongue?
I have no intention to stay then so kiss test is pointless.

[BanksRobin]

I do prefer DFK but if it’s not available then it’s not a total deal breaker for me. She looks hot enough that I could get my kicks through fucking and other services. Shame we don’t know how she performs with the other services.

I will consider a visit if she is available when I return.

[king tarzan]

I do prefer DFK but if it’s not available then it’s not a total deal breaker for me. She looks hot enough that I could get my kicks through fucking and other services. Shame we don’t know how she performs with the other services.

I will consider a visit if she is available when I return.

Should be deal breaker at £200 was £250 about 10 days ago

[GMontag]

Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do, no money exchanged hands, and clearly no action. If anything KT was just being a time waster. Yes FK is on her profile but we all know that could have been put by the site owners with little input from SP. Also could be she was so repelled or just not attracted enough to Mr KT but at least she was honest from the outset.

I feel this is an example of a very poor quality review which provides absolutely no information other than she doesn't do kissing. Not every punter is into kissing. What's to stop a flood of negatives just because a WG honestly says she doesn't offer a service and as he said, nicely?

[massagepuntingfan]

Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do, no money exchanged hands, and clearly no action. If anything KT was just being a time waster. Yes FK is on her profile but we all know that could have been put by the site owners with little input from SP. Also could be she was so repelled or just not attracted enough to Mr KT but at least she was honest from the outset.

I feel this is an example of a very poor quality review which provides absolutely no information other than she doesn't do kissing. Not every punter is into kissing. What's to stop a flood of negatives just because a WG honestly says she doesn't offer a service and as he said, nicely?

I agree. Red nose for KT.

[king tarzan]

Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do, no money exchanged hands, and clearly no action. If anything KT was just being a time waster. Yes FK is on her profile but we all know that could have been put by the site owners with little input from SP. Also could be she was so repelled or just not attracted enough to Mr KT but at least she was honest from the outset.

I feel this is an example of a very poor quality review which provides absolutely no information other than she doesn't do kissing. Not every punter is into kissing. What's to stop a flood of negatives just because a WG honestly says she doesn't offer a service and as he said, nicely?

Just ignore this white knight pointless dickhead prick..
Shoves his white knight face right up escorts arses!
Making no sense what so ever..

Dfk on her profile..
£200 an hour and no fucken kissing when face to face..
She deserves a negative..

[BanksRobin]

I agree this is useless as a review as nothing took place but it does provide useful intel and allows us to make a decision based on this. As I said, this review would not put me off as I know what is not available but unfortunately I don’t know what is available and how good.

The girl was up front and honest which is good but I guess the review is written from the perspective of the reviewer (KT in this case) and based on what he expected from the information given on the website.

[king tarzan]

I agree this is useless as a review as nothing took place but it does provide useful intel and allows us to make a decision based on this. As I said, this review would not put me off as I know what is not available but unfortunately I don’t know what is available and how good.

The girl was up front and honest which is good but I guess the review is written from the perspective of the reviewer (KT in this case) and based on what he expected from the information given on the website.

It's not a pointless review..
Stop backing the white knight.

[GMontag]

Just ignore this white knight pointless dickhead prick..
Shoves his white knight face right up escorts arses!
Making no sense what so ever..

Dfk on her profile..
£200 an hour and no fucken kissing when face to face..
She deserves a negative..

Easy dude. I'm no White Knight. LOL. Your vehemence is laughable and clearly ridiculous. I do not know the WG nor have any intention to see her. Your insults only go to reflect your state of mind which seems to flow and ebb, probably mental or drug induced.

You actually reviewed Me in far better detail than the poor excuse of a review you posted originally for a WG who you didn't have any interaction with. Now methinks she just laid eyes on you and wouldn't have any thing to do with you. And based on your drivel you post on here, I don't blame her

[GMontag]

It's not a pointless review..
Stop backing the white knight.

LOL. Doing the Trump thing of going on the attack to call me a white knight isn't going to change the fact that it's a pointless, useless even, review.

[BanksRobin]

I didn’t say it was pointless I agreed it was useless because it does not provide any detail of services as nothing took place.
If you bothered to read what I wrote you will see that I said you had provided useful information/intel which allows us to make a decision. For this I and I am sure others are grateful and I see this from your perspective; hence the negative review. Your review and your rating and thank you for providing the information.

[bonapati]

KT. Take a chill pill. You “walked” based on the fact that either your “kiss test” failed or the SP didn’t have what you wanted on the menu - therefore there I strongly agree with the above that this NOT a  “review”.

Probably a comment for the Diva recommendation” thread?

There is no white knighting going on... wake up for up and smell the java! You have had some good reviews, even though not all have been dripping with information to get one running to the school gates - this one however is NOT a review but a moan.

We have to accept that sometimes no matter how much we intend to pay, how good looking, well dressed, well endowed, well mannered... some legs will deny entry.

Ces”t la vie mon amie.

[bonapati]

I didn’t say it was pointless I agreed it was useless because it does not provide any detail of services as nothing took place.
If you bothered to read what I wrote you will see that I said you had provided useful information/intel which allows us to make a decision. For this I and I am sure others are grateful and I see this from your perspective; hence the negative review. Your review and your rating and thank you for providing the information.

I would have to disagree it’s useful unless you approach the SP with similar tactics.

I for one never approach asking whats on the menu, and 90% of the time I’ve had starters, main course and desert.

[JackSaint]

According to the site rules this is, indeed a valid review, meeting was arranged and attended, SP was unwilling to deliver on listed services, punter walked, posted a negative, useful intel for other punters.

"4 Reviews
A new review thread can only be created once a service provider has agreed to a booking. A meet does not need to take place, money does not need change hands, the only criteria is that she had accepted the initial booking. Members can post more than one review about an SP, but touting will result in a ban. Reviews are allowed up to 6 months after the event(positive or negative)"

[king tarzan]

LOL. Doing the Trump thing of going on the attack to call me a white knight isn't going to change the fact that it's a pointless, useless even, review.

Eye of the 🐁😭😭😭😭

[GMontag]

According to the site rules this is, indeed a valid review, meeting was arranged and attended, SP was unwilling to deliver on listed services, punter walked, posted a negative, useful intel for other punters.

"4 Reviews
A new review thread can only be created once a service provider has agreed to a booking. A meet does not need to take place, money does not need change hands, the only criteria is that she had accepted the initial booking. Members can post more than one review about an SP, but touting will result in a ban. Reviews are allowed up to 6 months after the event(positive or negative)"

Fair enough. But doesnt justify OP shouting White Knight just because someone has a different view. Totally moronic.

[cotton]

Shes got DFK on her profile. If KT arranged a booking and went to the trouble to travel to see her only to be told theres minimal kissing then its a legitimate grievance and a legitimate review.

[tantraman]

... Extremely sexy beautiful looking I would say at least 35+

Man, I wish all 35+ gals looked like this! ...

Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only

[king tarzan]

Man, I wish all 35+ gals looked like this! ...

Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only  Hidden Image/Members Only

Looks similar to my 🍯 🌹 girlfriend who is about 10 years older
But still in yummy delicious good nik for her age

[king tarzan]

I would have to disagree it’s useful unless you approach the SP with similar tactics.

I for one never approach asking whats on the menu, and 90% of the time I’ve had starters, main course and desert.

Don't be so trust worthy..
Especially in that environment..
Simpletto..

[daviemac]

Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do, no money exchanged hands, and clearly no action. If anything KT was just being a time waster. Yes FK is on her profile but we all know that could have been put by the site owners with little input from SP. Also could be she was so repelled or just not attracted enough to Mr KT but at least she was honest from the outset.

I feel this is an example of a very poor quality review which provides absolutely no information other than she doesn't do kissing. Not every punter is into kissing. What's to stop a flood of negatives just because a WG honestly says she doesn't offer a service and as he said, nicely?

I agree this is useless as a review as nothing took place but it does provide useful intel and allows us to make a decision based on this. As I said, this review would not put me off as I know what is not available but unfortunately I don’t know what is available and how good.

The girl was up front and honest which is good but I guess the review is written from the perspective of the reviewer (KT in this case) and based on what he expected from the information given on the website.

To be honest you're both coming across as, at least, defending her. She advertised DFK, amongst other things, if she fails to deliver then she gets a negative. Where do you get the "she was upfront about what she would do" from, if she doesn't want to provide services she shouldn't advertise them.

I think you both need to have another read of the rules regarding reviews. This one is valid.   

[GMontag]

To be honest you're both coming across as, at least, defending her. She advertised DFK, amongst other things, if she fails to deliver then she gets a negative. Where do you get the "she was upfront about what she would do" from, if she doesn't want to provide services she shouldn't advertise them.

I think you both need to have another read of the rules regarding reviews. This one is valid.

And as stated, based on the rules, I accept. However I disagree on your point of me "defending" the SP. At no point did I defend said WG, I dont know her, havent met her, and frankly, she is not my type. I do not care if the review is Negative or Positive. Its the OP's choice to rate as he sees. Her refusing to offer a service which was advertised is also her choice, the circumstances which for a agency we would know less about. Some punters wouldnt mind, some like OP its a deal breaker.
My whole point was on the review itself which I stated was a poor quality review. Yes, a valid review but I will still stand by my statement that it is rather poor quality based on both the OPs previous form (he does give some good quality reviews) and the content, or lack thereof.

[daviemac]

And as stated, based on the rules, I accept. However I disagree on your point of me "defending" the SP. At no point did I defend said WG, I dont know her, havent met her, and frankly, she is not my type. I do not care if the review is Negative or Positive. Its the OP's choice to rate as he sees. Her refusing to offer a service which was advertised is also her choice, the circumstances which for a agency we would know less about. Some punters wouldnt mind, some like OP its a deal breaker.
My whole point was on the review itself which I stated was a poor quality review. Yes, a valid review but I will still stand by my statement that it is rather poor quality based on both the OPs previous form (he does give some good quality reviews) and the content, or lack thereof.

You made a pretty clear statement in your post report, have you forgotten that already?? You also said in your post on here "Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do" that is a statement defending this SP. In truth she lied about what she would do, she said on her profile the services that were available, but refused those services in the booking.

What more detail do you need, he turned up, she refused some services so he left.   

[GMontag]

You made a pretty clear statement in your post report, have you forgotten that already?? You also said in your post on here "Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do" that is a statement defending this SP. In truth she lied about what she would do, she said on her profile the services that were available, but refused those services in the booking.

What more detail do you need, he turned up, she refused some services so he left.   

I wrote the comment, can read, and have not forgotten my response sir.
I do not see that as a defense of the SP but a statement of a fact based on KTs review.
We will have to disagree on this. Not going to attempt to change your mind and not really interested in doing so.
Your interpretation of my comment as a defense, your view.
I, who made the comment state I am not defending the SP which I have clearly stated, if you read, I have no affliation with not intend to.

[Titti Tatti]

...it was a short but stormy marriage 

[king tarzan]

...it was a short but stormy marriage 

What was?

[Igor]

+1 Cotton, how many times have we complained when services advertised aren't on offer, especially when this sp is at the higher end, should not have dfk on the menu.

[Baxter63]

From Tatti's profile page -  'All services are provided based on lady's sole discretion'.

[LLPunting]

You made a pretty clear statement in your post report, have you forgotten that already?? You also said in your post on here "Don't see the point of this as a review. SP was upfront as to what she wouldn't do" that is a statement defending this SP. In truth she lied about what she would do, she said on her profile the services that were available, but refused those services in the booking.

What more detail do you need, he turned up, she refused some services so he left.   

Gotta disagree.  Montag was just pointing out that desired services were declined BEFORE money changed hands.  There's no difference to a girl saying sorry no RO because I'm having my period.  Whether she never does kissing or just was revolted by KT we'll not know unless someone else (of good standing) reviews her.

KT's response was out of proportion as his Neg is just because she wouldn't kiss him.  He didn't even proceed with the encounter.  At most this is a Neutral for the girl, a Neg would've come from any service being declined during the paid for experience OR if he had been talking to the escort from the start and she lured him there under false pretenses.  As the booking was made with an agency this would be a Neg for the agency as false advertising.

[The Film Director]

Shes got DFK on her profile. If KT arranged a booking and went to the trouble to travel to see her only to be told theres minimal kissing then its a legitimate grievance and a legitimate negative review.

+1

[Lorachoop]

KT, as her name Tatti means Poo in Punjabi, you avoided a shit punt mate 

[king tarzan]

KT, as her name Tatti means Poo in Punjabi, you avoided a shit punt mate 

Obviously I knew that 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[daviemac]

Gotta disagree.  Montag was just pointing out that desired services were declined BEFORE money changed hands.  There's no difference to a girl saying sorry no RO because I'm having my period.  Whether she never does kissing or just was revolted by KT we'll not know unless someone else (of good standing) reviews her.

KT's response was out of proportion as his Neg is just because she wouldn't kiss him.  He didn't even proceed with the encounter.  At most this is a Neutral for the girl, a Neg would've come from any service being declined during the paid for experience OR if he had been talking to the escort from the start and she lured him there under false pretenses.  As the booking was made with an agency this would be a Neg for the agency as false advertising.

Feel free to disagree, but the only reason I'm responding on this thread is because GMontag reported it. In my opinion and in accordance with the rules, it doesn't matter at what stage of the booking king tarzan walked, or if the money hadn't changed hands, the fact remains advertised services were refused, as a result not wanting to proceed further he left and posted a valid and justified negative.

Agencies can not be reviewed, only the escort concerned and it's up to her to ensure they represent her correctly, if she doesn't do that then she risks getting negative reviews.

king tarzan posted this review and it's not up to others to say what rating it should or shouldn't be, it's his choice. As with any review members should use the information provided and form their own opinions on it's merit.

[Titti Tatti]

What was?

I knew that we were heading for the rocks when she started demanding extra 'housekeeping' BEFORE Anal and CIM. Plus I noticed she was making false noises and trying to get me to have a second shower after only 45 mins. 

When she got her third iPhone I decided it was time to call it a day. That's when her brothers arrived and it really got ugly.

TBC ( if KT still doesn't get it ).

[TTGR]

  ....As I have only a small fraction of KT’s reviews total, I’d be embarrassed to post gripy shit about an obviously legit negative review. Maybe some others need to reflect the same.

I hate when advertised DFK turns out to be lying bollocks. All such profiles deserve a negative.

[golden bull]

Lots of waffle here, we’ll need some beans.
Bottom line as admin says, KT’s review so he can rate it whatever the fuck he likes
Still I’d like to see what this SP is like as her second selfie looks hot 🔥

[golden bull]

And Gmontag being a Bertie over nothing is bad form.... I think there’s bad blood between you and KT

[Baxter63]

....As I have only a small fraction of KT’s reviews total, I’d be embarrassed to post gripy shit about an obviously legit negative review. Maybe some others need to reflect the same.

I hate when advertised DFK turns out to be lying bollocks. All such profiles deserve a negative.

Not lying bollocks. As I posted earlier and from the Diva page for Tatti - ''All services are provided based on lady's sole discretion'. It's up to any member how he rates things but it's wise to read the ads properly, too.

A/Work is full of 'at discretion' and it seems to be read and accepted. Why not on an agency ad.?

[The Film Director]

Not lying bollocks. As I posted earlier and from the Diva page for Tatti - ''All services are provided based on lady's sole discretion'. It's up to any member how he rates things but it's wise to read the ads properly, too.

A/Work is full of 'at discretion' and it seems to be read and accepted. Why not on an agency ad.?

Presumably you would agree that if she didn't provide any services - as they're all at discretion - then that might constitute 'lying bollocks' 

[king tarzan]

Lots of white knights on here

Escort always right
KT always wrong

[daviemac]

Not lying bollocks. As I posted earlier and from the Diva page for Tatti - ''All services are provided based on lady's sole discretion'. It's up to any member how he rates things but it's wise to read the ads properly, too.

A/Work is full of 'at discretion' and it seems to be read and accepted. Why not on an agency ad.?

Stop defending her, that profile is designed to deceive, the font of that disclaimer is half the size of the rest and it isn't even listed after the services, it's further down the page.

By your theory she could refuse to do anything other than sit and talk during a booking and that would be OK??

There's a big difference in stating anal is at discretion as that is relevant to size and the physical capabilities of her arse.     

[whoya.kiddin]

Thanks for the review KT. 

I seriously question any punter's motives that cannot see the value of a review that points out inaccuracies in a SP service description.  Reviews pointing out that advertised services arenot available have saved me countless waisted bookings and a lot of money. 

Thanks also for the clarification from DavieMac that this is within the rules and a valid review.

[king tarzan]

Thanks for the review KT. 

I seriously question any punter's motives that cannot see the value of a review that points out inaccuracies in a SP service description.  Reviews pointing out that advertised services arenot available have saved me countless waisted bookings and a lot of money. 

Thanks also for the clarification from DavieMac that this is within the rules and a valid review.

I think Gmontag loves to white knight wrong doing SP against me..
And LL Punting old 🦊 if she found me revolting as you put it she wouldn't of offered me the best mind blowing blow job..

[GMontag]

I think Gmontag loves to white knight wrong doing SP against me..
And LL Punting old 🦊 if she found me revolting as you put it she wouldn't of offered me the best mind blowing blow job..

Lol. This is funny. Past your imbecilic attempts at writing, total inability to understand anything else but what goes on in your imagination you do contribute quite a lot. Most is drivel but a contribution is a contribution.

 I questioned the quality of your review which as a long standing member I thought you would take on the chin. And yes I did report the post as I felt it wasn't fit to be a review. I did not reference the wg in my report, and those with access to my report comment can verify.

The reaction to throw the label White Knight at me, even after I have accepted the validity of your review, shows really the state of your mind. The forum is by punters for punters and I totally accept that. However I would not accept an imposition of just any viewpoint because a member here says so. You have disagreed with punters taking the side of WGs in the past and I can prove it but not bothered. I do not defend this WG and will reject any attempt to say I am doing so. Perhaps your attempt to get me a ban? LOL. Keep it up.

But I'll let that rest. You started with the insults which was ignored by the board moderators but that's no skin off my nose. You obviously are using this to fill something totally missing in your life.

Happy punting 

[daviemac]

Lol. This is funny. Past your imbecilic attempts at writing, total inability to understand anything else but what goes on in your imagination you do contribute quite a lot. Most is drivel but a contribution is a contribution.

 I questioned the quality of your review which as a long standing member I thought you would take on the chin. And yes I did report the post as I felt it wasn't fit to be a review. I did not reference the wg in my report, and those with access to my report comment can verify.

The reaction to throw the label White Knight at me, even after I have accepted the validity of your review, shows really the state of your mind. The forum is by punters for punters and I totally accept that. However I would not accept an imposition of just any viewpoint because a member here says so. You have disagreed with punters taking the side of WGs in the past and I can prove it but not bothered. I do not defend this WG and will reject any attempt to say I am doing so. Perhaps your attempt to get me a ban? LOL. Keep it up.

But I'll let that rest. You started with the insults which was ignored by the board moderators but that's no skin off my nose. You obviously are using this to fill something totally missing in your life.

Happy punting 

When you're in a hole stop digging mate. You're dragging this on trying to justify yourself. Your posts come across as defending her and I'm not the only one who thinks that. This is a valid and justified review, how well it is written is irrelevant.

You reported the review, the review is of this particular escort, how is that not referencing her.   

Try reading your first post again then think who started with the insults. You have done nothing but insult KT throughout this thread.

[GMontag]

When you're in a hole stop digging mate. You're dragging this on trying to justify yourself. Your posts come across as defending her and I'm not the only one who thinks that. This is a valid and justified review, how well it is written is irrelevant.

You reported the review, the review is of this particular escort, how is that not referencing her.   

Try reading your first post again then think who started with the insults. You have done nothing but insult KT throughout this thread.

And he's done nothing but be kind to me?

Oh well, all noted. I stand down.

[king tarzan]

Lol. This is funny. Past your imbecilic attempts at writing, total inability to understand anything else but what goes on in your imagination you do contribute quite a lot. Most is drivel but a contribution is a contribution.

 I questioned the quality of your review which as a long standing member I thought you would take on the chin. And yes I did report the post as I felt it wasn't fit to be a review. I did not reference the wg in my report, and those with access to my report comment can verify.

The reaction to throw the label White Knight at me, even after I have accepted the validity of your review, shows really the state of your mind. The forum is by punters for punters and I totally accept that. However I would not accept an imposition of just any viewpoint because a member here says so. You have disagreed with punters taking the side of WGs in the past and I can prove it but not bothered. I do not defend this WG and will reject any attempt to say I am doing so. Perhaps your attempt to get me a ban? LOL. Keep it up.

But I'll let that rest. You started with the insults which was ignored by the board moderators but that's no skin off my nose. You obviously are using this to fill something totally missing in your life.

Happy punting 

I don't go out of my way trying to get people banned.
We are all 1 PUNTERS UNITED..
the boardroom
The managers
The players..

[lewishamguy]

......
But I'll let that rest. You started with the insults which was ignored by the board moderators but that's no skin off my nose...

The only person will get you banned he is no one but you.