Popular media on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

UKPunting is a free, independent and not-for-profit paid sex buyer site.


Author Topic: Guide to typical prossie rebuttals  (Read 5561 times)

Offline Ali Katt

This is designed sort of as a (newbie) guide given some of the replies we've had to reports and to wanting feedback removed. It also serves as a guide to typical AW responses and UKPunting reviews. I've tried to make it as balanced and fair as I could. Also check out this thread: https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=33152.0

Punter: "Cara Cumlips was disinterested, didn't offer OWO and DFK despite advertising it"
Prossie response: "Mouth smell of shit and the rest you don't even want to know"
Reality: These are classic\cliched prossie rebuttals. It is implied the man had a cheesy knob, maybe even genital warts or similar without saying it. Notice how the prossie hasn't denied not offering these services. She was simply caught out so used Ad Hominem, she might not have fancied the customer, but shouldn't be mis-advertising services.

If the man did have genital warts or stunk he should have been offered a shower or refund and sent on his way, notice how she took his money, indicating to me she is dishonest.

Punter: "Cara was fatter than in the pictures, looked a lot older than her stated age of 25 and had a different hair colour"
Prossie response: "The pictures are 100% me, I have put on some weight since, but other men like it. I've had no complaints"
Reality: The prossie used old pictures or possibly fake pictures as implied. There is no reason for the prossie to use old pictures, while some are busy it probably takes less than 30 mins to get a new picture taken. As for lying about her age, IMHO there is no excuse, just because everyone does it, doesn't make it right.

Punter: "A crap shag"
Prossie response: "Punt never happened"
Reality: A typical AW response. While a pimp or rival WG might use fake feedback to put people off seeing the competition, this is rare. The prossie wants to deny the punt took place rather than acknowledge her poor service.

Punter: "The worst on AW. Avoid."
Prossie response: "This man is a serial stalker. I refused booking"
Reality: If, it is a stalker it is a police matter. Let's not deny stalkers exist, but it seems to me everyone with bad feedback has one. A typical Ad hominem argument. If the punter has seen the girl multiple times and gave her a negative everytime, Why? In which case discount it as fake or a shit stirrer. AW girls can also block messages (and bookings) from members.

Punter: "Cara Cumlips was great, did everything on the tin and with enthusiasm, quiet discreet house in Nuneaton"
Prossie response: "These reports out me to my husband, kids and I have been threatened because of them. My kids are now in custody"
Reality: Maybe she didn't offer the services such as OWO to everyone and doesn't want other punters to find out. Maybe the husband twigged long before. But, I fail to see why it would be contentious or an issue, the only thing I could think of is if the prossie was planning on retiring. It is not the punter's responsibility for what goes on in a prossie's private life.

Punter: "Closed lips kissing, crap BJ tried mainly wanking me off, cowgirl and doggy tried to make me cum as quick as possible"
Prossie response: "This is untrue, since this report my phone has stopped ringing."
Reality: It's a case of who do you trust? A proper prossie rebuttal with the reasons why kissing wasn't offered, would be better. IMHO if the sex was that bad, I hope punters save their money and see someone else. As we all know one report is not enough to put a bad prossie "out of business".

Punter: "A cold experience, no English, rushed me out after 15 minutes, has a cum once policy, but said I could cum as many times as I liked on the profile"
Prossie response: "Man was a boundary pusher. Tried to do things I don't offer. He was also abusive. I asked him to leave".
Reality: We know prossies deal with abusive punters and I think woman beaters and the like should just fuck off and die. Her response is hidden in innuendo, abusive could mean a number of things at worst violent. Boundary pusher once again innuendo, the implication being he forced her to do something. Without clarification, the report is masked in innuendo by both parties, but if it was written by a trusted punter I would presume the punter was rushed out due to a double booking and a cum once policy (mis-advertised services). Maybe OWO was mis-advertised and the man asked for a refund. Once again, needs clarification.

Punter: "Looks 10/10, Personality 10/10, Service: 10/10, Location 10/10."
Reality: Write this off as an easily pleased fluffy. Obviously, looks and personality are subjective, but I've never met a prossie that is a 10/10 and nor will any girl with a tattoo score a 10 from me. I see these punters as trying to score brownie points for a future booking. Some may disagree on this one.

Punter: "Saw Cara Cumlips yesterday, boy can she talk, she looked disgusted when I suggest we have sex, after an OK blowjob and a bit of doggy, I came. She offered a massage I accepted, it was OK. With 10 minutes left on the clock it was clear she wasn't going to do round two"
Prossie response: "I thought that's what he wanted".
Reality: I have a theory many prossies use a check list or a sequence. This man should have been more communicative in what he wanted. I always check if I can cum more than once in an hour booking. The reality is this prossie had planned not to offer round 2 and offered an easier option in this case, massage instead to run the clock down. She was talking incessantly as implied, not necessarily to make him, be at ease or to be nice, but to run the clock down as the suggestion of sex was met with disgust. This is a disingenuous act, as the prossie was nice to him, not cold, offered the services listed and did them to an OK standard, but he didn't get value for money. It has happened to me in my early punting days and now it would be an automatic negative. While, the punter is not to blame, as she had no intention of offering a full on sexy session, he could have asked for sex earlier or not accepted an (OK) massage.

Other rebuttals: "If the man wanted to bang away for an hour like a rabbit he sould have seen someone else".
Erm. It's a bit like saying if someone want their pipes unblocking, they should get a different plumber.

"How dare you review me. We're not pieces of meat, we are human not "prossies" and I have a string of regulars".
A typical response. Once again, doesn't deny a bad service or tries to improve it. Can be discarded IMHO.

"You little dicks can't afford me anyway"
Often posted when prices are criticised. Once again, a person can pay what they deem reasonable given market values. And just because a punter chooses not to pay £400 an hour, doesn't mean they can't afford it.

"My adultwork pictures are copyrighted. I'm seeking leagal action"
Note the deliberate spelling mistake. We only link pictures which are widely available. None are uploaded to this site. Maybe they should chase people that upload rips of their webcams.

"This review is vile. Remove it now"
No-one wants a banned review list. No-one wants to see they can't review Cara Cumlips and can only review one girl from LMP a month and can't review threesomes.

"I wouldn't trust a review posted on a Neanderthal site full of sexist pigs"
She obviously, took time to read it. Maybe she is more used to the fawning "too much of a gent to say" reports that offer no value to the punter and are pointless. A lot of prossies do take this site seriously and a good review works wonders for their trade.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 04:32:56 PM by Ali Katt »

Offline James999

Odd how pro$$ies often use the rebuttal of reviews where services were not provided by the excuse of "his hygeine" (often without even knowing who the client was) now assuming hygeine was an issue why didn't the pro$$ie either decline the booking or get the guy to shower / wash / babywipe  :sarcastic:

Offline vorian

A well written post and refreshingly accurate, I am often amazed when prossies join the site to make one of the above statements, then they might claim they read the forum regularly.  If that was the case then surely they would know that talking rubbish will be immediately challenged and by making these comments they only make the situation worse for themselves.
Banning reason: Two faced - Slagging off UKP and it's membership using fake account

Nice post. It is well to remember that there are three sides to every story (yours, mine and the truth) and whilst I would probably not be inclined to pay much attention to a poorly written negative review from someone who was clearly taking the piss, an escort who takes the time to reply to every negative review is going to raise some alarm bells in my mind.
It is all down to how someone presents themselves. Fair and balanced reviews must attract more business than the fawning ones and any punter you actually want to see is going to accept the reality that you can occasionally have a bad day.

Offline CBPaul

Good post  :thumbsup:

Some of the prossie rebuttals amaze me. The most common has to be;

Punter: Made booking, arrived at venue and she didn't answer phone.
Prossie: 'You never made a booking' or 'I was on holiday' or  'You arrived late'  etc etc
Reality: Could be either way, most likely the punter has been overlooked / forgotten or blown out for a better offer. Alternatively could just be a stupid punter.

Offline AnthG

Punter: "A crap shag"
Prossie response: "Punt never happened"
Reality: A typical AW response. While a pimp or rival WG might use fake feedback to put people off seeing the competition, this is rare. The prossie wants to deny the punt took place rather than acknowledge her poor service.
Of the list this one I personally believe it when the girl says its a rival trying to ruin her business that does these.  Am I the only one on that one?

I just don't think a punter if he has a terrible booking would describe it as a "crap shag" as this is of no help to other punters. And to be honest during the booking this is the one thing the girl will get right. A punter would likely say refused to do Oral or something in my opinion.

Offline CoolTiger

Another one is where a negative comment by a punter is usually turned into "he was smelly or he requested BB, thereby fucking up his AW feedback, for what it's worth.

Offline Ali Katt

Some good responses and a lot of missed, the phone being off as mentioned by CBPaul. Anth, the punter reviews are pretty much interchangeable on this thread it's the responses I'm debating.
The other one I missed was, and it works for the phone being off.
"I was sick, my kid was sick, had to pick the kids up from school" and while being ill is awful, I saw one AW feedback profile where a friend was sick twice in a month, as a reason for cancelling. While this can happen, I think it is a get out clause for some nefarious prossies, as no punter will question their kids getting sick will they?

These are also used rebuttals that I have seen, many on here.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 11:53:09 PM by Ali Katt »

Offline Ali Katt

Another one is where a negative comment by a punter is usually turned into "he was smelly or he requested BB, thereby fucking up his AW feedback, for what it's worth.
I'm sure most punters request bareback by email or text first, which is why so many list they don't do it. Judging by the threads on here, I would say most punters don't want it, I won't book anyone that offers bareback. The AW feedback is important for many punters, I don't give a toss I don't use the booking system.

Offline CoolTiger

I'm sure most punters request bareback by email or text first, which is why so many list they don't do it. Judging by the threads on here, I would say most punters don't want it, I won't book anyone that offers bareback. The AW feedback is important for many punters, I don't give a toss I don't use the booking system.

Perhaps my original thread did not make it clear.

I know of a member who's been a victim of this. He booked a girl (who never offered BB) but the WG did not provide the services offered/promised to him. Consequently, he left her a negative FB on AW. Her response was to then turn against him and put against his profile claim that HE was the timewaster, he was smelly, and asked for BB.

Is anyone aware if similar rebuttal been posted on UKP?
« Last Edit: July 16, 2014, 01:42:54 AM by CoolTiger »

Offline SirFrank

Sadly I've yet to see many WGs take negative feedback on the chin. I left honest negative feedback once when a punt didn't happen (sent to wrong hotel, then asked me to rebook on way to right hotel as next punter had turned up etc) and she tried to turn that around. Not even a I'm sorry about my mistake etc etc.

If you saw such aggressive responses on tripadvisor reviews for hotels or restaurants it would confirm two things: 1) the owners are cunts, 2) it's a place to avoid. There's always two sides to the story but most rebuttals generally create a worse impression of the SP
Banning reason: Shitstirring against admin on behalf of banned member

Offline CBPaul

I'm sure most punters request bareback by email or text first, which is why so many list they don't do it. Judging by the threads on here, I would say most punters don't want it, I won't book anyone that offers bareback. The AW feedback is important for many punters, I don't give a toss I don't use the booking system.

For the punters actively seeking bareback and the prossies who openly advertise it I'm sure bareback is all arranged beforehand, there is a group of 6 profiles in Cambridge at the moment (OK, in reality not necessarily 6 different prossies), been touring around for a good few months now and all offering bareback. All have zero feedback. They must be doing business with someone, just that the punters don't want their nicks associated with a barebacker - whether they go covered or not.

AW feedback as we all know is generally useless. I do take a look at it though;

Ignore the positive reviews - 49% are fabricated, 49% are fluffy and 2% are vaguely accurate.
Take note of the negatives and neutrals - and the rebuttals - any of these should serve as a warning.
Take note of the feedback only reports, can be informative and again serve as a warning.
If feedback is hidden click the back button.

Offline caramelceleste

  • Banned
  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 27
Nice post. It is well to remember that there are three sides to every story (yours, mine and the truth) and whilst I would probably not be inclined to pay much attention to a poorly written negative review from someone who was clearly taking the piss, an escort who takes the time to reply to every negative review is going to raise some alarm bells in my mind.
It is all down to how someone presents themselves. Fair and balanced reviews must attract more business than the fawning ones and any punter you actually want to see is going to accept the reality that you can occasionally have a bad day.

Agreed with this. Thus far no I have no negative feedback, if I did... would I reply? Probably not.
I think just getting on with business and replacing that latest negative review with a new, improved (real) good one is enough to allow people to read between the lines, whether she was having an off day or really didn't like the punter.
If you're going to reply, I think it's best to keep it sweet and polite regardless of what they said... take the high road, although I'm sure it must be hard to take once you have been publicly slated a little or a lot!

Being bitchy/going apeshit can't be immensely attractive so is probably best avoided in permanent connection with your profile... too much common sense perhaps?

Offline Ali Katt

These ones have been coming up a lot:

Punter: Poor service, looked much older than the pictures, no working shower.
Prossie Response: Lies. I've never seen him.
Punter 2: I've seen Cara, doesn't offer OWO, closed lips kissing, flat was a mess, talked constantly about her boyfriend. A poor punt.
Prossie: More lies.
Reality: With two punters to back it up it is clear the prossie is offering bad service and fails to acknowledge it and worse still not improve it. If punter 1 was the first time poster it could be questionable, if the feedback is from established, respected punters I usually side with them.

Punter: at £250 an hour this punt didn't offer VFM. Cara Cumlips seemed to be talking my time away, nothing she said was witty, as AW FB suggests. When I asked something interesting, she gave one word responses, obviously not interested in me. BJ was without, but average at best, no eye contact. During sex she stared at the wall and didn't look at me. I tried to kiss her and she turned away from me. Fake moans during doggy I could tell she was bored shitless. She stayed for the hour, non rushed, but it's clear she just wants the money without the effort. Avoid lads, unless you like crap sex.
Prossie: I have a string of sophisticated regulars. Maybe I wasn't for you. If you wanted a kiss you should have asked. I do provide a great service, look at my feedback over 200 positive. Looks like we didn't click.
Reality: Even at £50 this wouldn't be value for most people, but at the price he expected better. It is clear Cara Cumlips had no intention of offering a kiss or anything that could be considered a GFE. Feedback can be discarded as I have seen women with over 80 high positive feedback and had a shit time, feedback on AW should be used as a guide not gospel, check for neutrals if there are any. Cara thought the service was good enough she stayed for the time, she talked a bit and appeared friendly, perhaps, but the sex was bad, she offered most thing advertised, but didn't put in the effort - fake moans don't count. Cara failed to acknowledge her piss poor service and blamed the punter twice: Maybe I wasn't for you. suggests she didn't think he was attractive or good enough for her, We didn't click is the worst excuse for providing a shabby service, don't buy into it. Whilst the convo may not have been good why use it as an excuse not to kiss or be the proverbial sack o' tatties? Who cares if she has regulars, I have found that bad service is rarely a one-off.
Punter reply back: I think you're right. We didn't click, maybe I saw her on an off-day. fuck off you fluffy cunt


Offline Ali Katt

Here's a new one based on a rebuttal.
Punter: Cara Cumlips put her prices up £20 for 30 mins. Obviously trying to cash in on the xmas rush.
Prossie Response: I'm fuming. I only put my prices up £5. Talk about Mr Cheapskate, my overheads have gone up recently so my prices reflect this. I can't believe someone who probably hasn't seen me chooses to slag me off. If you don't like it don't pay for it. I would never trust comments on a tinpot rude website anyway.
Reality: As you will notice Cara fails to admit she put her prices up £20 for 30 and only mentions the £5 increase for the hour, not 30 mins to make the punter appear petty. We all have overheads and I'm sure in 99% of cases they have increased recently and while I have no qualms about prossies increasing prices they should never be exempt from criticism. I'm sure many took a paycut or never had an increase this year, but most punters would not haggle prices because the price of petrol or rail travel went up. The prossie proceeds to slag off (oh the irony) the website, alluding that she is too good to be associated with it, the comment could have been a response to a good review or a potential future client, causing the Ratner effect for her "business". The prossie is entitled to vent, but should be aware that it probably reflects badly on her and as mentioned just because the punter is branded a "cheapskate" that doesn't mean he can't afford it.

Offline a10

 :lol: quality! Good info on here  :drinks: always handy to rebut the fluffy bullshit

I'm sure it's simply but how do you leave feedback only on AW, i've gone onto the feedback section a few times but the indication is that you can only leave feedback if the booking has been accepted.
Probably why some girls don't actually accept the booking even when they insist you make one (thereby helping to ensure you are genuine and hold your end of the bargin)
Had some poor comments to make in the past but didn't know how to leave feedback only, from my experience this is often the most honest and reliable feedback on a bad girls profile, 90% or more of A/W feedback is total BS after all she is hardly going to publish a crap field report.

Offline GeeWiz

I'm sure it's simply but how do you leave feedback only on AW, i've gone onto the feedback section a few times but the indication is that you can only leave feedback if the booking has been accepted.

You can leave 'Feedback Only' after the booking time, but can only give a 'Positive' or 'Negative' if it is confirmed by the SP.

If a pro goes on holiday and leaves her profile active, then she may return to feedback stating "Didn't happen" etc.  Otherwise I believe they need to be active in denying booking requests.

OK cheers, will try that next time I have a crap punt with no confirmed booking

Offline Ali Katt

This one keeps coming up. It is based on genuine adultwork feedback:
Punter 1: Cara Cumplips ran off with my money. When I got outside a big burly cunt with a dog told me to do one.
Prossie response: This man asked me for incest play involving his daughter. Sick bastard I told him I don't do that and he got violent.

Punter 2: Cara Cumlips and I got down to the business. She left the room to freshen up. There's a knock at the door and big ugly fat cunt with a dog asks if I am fucking his girlfriend.
Prossie response: Man tried to force bareback on me and did some nasty things including calling me a fat slag and worse. I work on my own no idea where the man came from. He probably made it up because I wouldn't do his sick fantasies. Avoid girls.

Reality: Given that it's not a one-off it is clearly a scam. With the boyfriend/pimp in on it. I could be wrong, but I doubt a genuine punter would request incest play about his daughter; an obvious ploy to make the punter appear like a paedo. The forced bareback line is one of the oldest in her handbook and then some innuendo making it unclear what was said leaving the reader to think he is worse than he actually is. Prossies do get violent punters and the punters should be ashamed of themselves. This response is a shit-stirring attempt and the punters in question should go to the police and report the scam. It's theft and it's not fucking on.

Offline Lilywhite

  • Service Provider
  • Posts: 328
Common one.

Punter 1: Not the best.
Prossie Response: Unclean and a boundary pusher. Watch out girls.

Offline Ben4454

A rebuttal technique I have seen recently is if a prossie has had multiple negatives she will say it is the same guy who is creating multiple accounts and say he is a stalker. Even though they are multiple punters who had a bad service.

Punter: Bad service attitude and did not do any services listed
Prossie response: Tried to make me do BB and was a boundary pusher.

Punter: Horrible girl who couldn't get me out quick enough
Prossie response: Same guy as before creating multiple accounts to see me! Stalker
« Last Edit: February 24, 2015, 06:26:41 PM by Ben4454 »
Banning reason: Ignored admin warning after temporary banning and signed up to malicious troll anti-UKP site

Online cueball

I have one that baffles me....

Punter.... avoid, not a good service, messes you about
Dirty Doris... why are leaving feedback when we've never met, nor shall we


Now, to leave aw feedback I thought the booking has to be confirmed by the prossie?

Offline The_Don

I have one that baffles me....

Punter.... avoid, not a good service, messes you about
Dirty Doris... why are leaving feedback when we've never met, nor shall we


Now, to leave aw feedback I thought the booking has to be confirmed by the prossie?

Is it "Feedback Only"
« Last Edit: February 24, 2015, 06:46:37 PM by The_Don »


Latest videos on UKEscorting.com (free site!)

Latest images on UKEscorting.com (free site!)