Amour and Diamonds should be informed if 2 escorts working at same flat?

[MDB72]

As I see it if you see an independent girl working on her own exclusively from a flat or house then there can be no suggestion that falls under the definition of a brothel. So if the prospect of being in a brothel worries you then that is the best prospect. The agencies are in a difficult position in respect of the law. There are many arguments they could use if prosecuted - one of the most obvious would be to say they merely provide a service for the girls e.g call handling and diary management. That's a very basic argument but they have to keep their distance from what happens. If they were to say - when asked for an incall that there are two girls working that would imply that they knew what was happening. If two girls are openly working then there is a risk of neighbour complaints which might spark police interest. In a raid they would ask for the details of the punter. Being in a brothel is not an offence but the police could make it difficult for the punter. If you use an agency that openly has girls working in a flat then find one that is more discreet or accept the risk.

[greychap]

She was on here yes and did get banned for fake reviews and offering fake compensation to the fake punter...i think

However i do find her and the agency excellent , this is by no way a beef at them just a general rant at girls doing this at the moment, i understand why they do it but it doesnt mean i have to put up with it

Amour has been highlighted cos she has responded in a way that concerns some punters??

So basically Stacey has a history of telling lies and writing fake reviews so I should imagine most of the reviews on the amour site are not to be trusted either.

Shame she did not seem too bad, but how this 2 girl or even 3 girl situation has certainly not been handled the right way by her ranting on her website because a few of us have pointed it out. We have a right to be comfortable when we punt and use Amour because its marketed as only 1 girl per flat.

[femalepunter]

So basically Stacey has a history of telling lies and writing fake reviews so I should imagine most of the reviews on the amour site are not to be trusted either.

Shame she did not seem too bad, but how this 2 girl or even 3 girl situation has certainly not been handled the right way by her ranting on her website because a few of us have pointed it out. We have a right to be comfortable when we punt and use Amour because its marketed as only 1 girl per flat.

Nah I wouldn't say the reviews are fake, if u think abt the amount of bookings they must take, there is a very small percentage or reviews get posted, if they were being faked there would be tonnes more.

[greychap]

Nah I wouldn't say the reviews are fake, if u think abt the amount of bookings they must take, there is a very small percentage or reviews get posted, if they were being faked there would be tonnes more.

Ok maybe some then.

[AnthG]

So basically Stacey has a history of telling lies and writing fake reviews so I should imagine most of the reviews on the amour site are not to be trusted either.

Here is the actual review thread where she was banned so you can see what exactly took place.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=19262

With regards to reviews on any agency websites. Never trust them. Take them with a huge pinch of salt. Always trust the reviews on this forum. And to be honest the same thing applies to pretty much any retailers website. Never trust the reviews they post, always look for independent reviews.

[Trelf]

Well,I've left reviews on the Amour website several times and they were reproduced 100% accurately and in their entirety.

[femalepunter]

Well,I've left reviews on the Amour website several times and they were reproduced 100% accurately and in their entirety.

As were mine

[ProfessorYaffle]

Well,I've left reviews on the Amour website several times and they were reproduced 100% accurately and in their entirety.

When I saw Amelia she asked me to send in some feedback so I did...and they didn't use it (and yes it was very positive).  I was a bit miffed as it's bloody laborious writing it out as a text.

[Greenman]

I have wrote 7/8 reviews in armour website and all published exactly as I wrote them
Never had any issues with armour
Stacy great to get on with

[themademan2]

I think what stacy is arguing is that no 2 advertised Amour girls work together at the same time in the same flat and that as indies shes powerless to stop it....which would mean its pointless asking Amour prior to booking if the girl is alone cos the answer will (as far as stacey is aware) always be yes, despite a girl on Amours books working as an indie there too on the same day

Even if you turn up and ask the fuckers will still lie to you, she will just go in and tell her "mate" to be quiet during her booking(assuming shes not getting fucked already then it becomes obvious).

Like i said , i dont know how Amour can police it

Non of you guys spotted it but Kia (now jenny) and Molly were both working out same place, one down as blaydon and the other down as swallwell (both actually working whickham same premises!). I knew as when I asked Molly for a shower, she said Kia was downstairs. Even greenman review for Kia originally stated that her friend answered door! So that confirms my info that the agency was having 2 working same place same time knowingly!

[realalefan]

This is the type of thing that puts me off using agencies full stop.  Wish they would just have ladies working out of one flat and not try and be vague with escorts and punters as to the law.

 

[Toshiba]

Non of you guys spotted it but Kia (now jenny) and Molly were both working out same place, one down as blaydon and the other down as swallwell (both actually working whickham same premises!). I knew as when I asked Molly for a shower, she said Kia was downstairs. Even greenman review for Kia originally stated that her friend answered door! So that confirms my info that the agency was having 2 working same place same time knowingly!

Missed that...........well if true thats the whole Amour credibility thing i gave them out the window and they seem the same as Diamonds, difficult to do much about it other than ask before booking now

[Jamessn]

if you get caught in a brothel by police they confirm who you are first, so you have to show true ID, they check it, make you write a statement, how you made the appointment etc, what was discussed first, did you know you would get sex. They then check the girl's ID and the story, if it matches with yours they let you go as you haven't done anything illegal and you are classed as a witness. Saw this on a forum somewhere, can't find it now.

However, they ask the girl if she has been coerced, trafficked etc. if she says yes then you are in deep, deep do do. You will end up in court.

Not worth the risk is it? So no agency is safe or trustworthy.

Someone told me that Stacy has got really greedy, she charges the girls the full amount of commission for no shows. Now it appears she is turning a blind eye to brothels too.

Glad I saw this thread I was going to use amour for my next foray. I think I will stick to occasional out calls to a hotel from now to be on the safe side.

[Toshiba]

Jesus.....think im going to consider sticking to AW after reading that

Ive too much to lose and its not worth it tbh, this 2 in a flat malarky has bothered me for a while now, agghh i just dont know anymore

Scary if true, i know raids arent often but it just takes the once n thats it for me

[themademan2]

Missed that...........well if true thats the whole Amour credibility thing i gave them out the window and they seem the same as Diamonds, difficult to do much about it other than ask before booking now

Looks like Stacey banned u from her competition on the other forum Holycrosser! It's the one u entered the competition. Apparently she won't accept your entry for lying about her 

Looks like competitions are fixed anyway if that's any consolation Holycrosser 

[AnthG]

if you get caught in a brothel by police they confirm who you are first, so you have to show true ID, they check it, make you write a statement, how you made the appointment etc, what was discussed first, did you know you would get sex. They then check the girl's ID and the story, if it matches with yours they let you go as you haven't done anything illegal and you are classed as a witness. Saw this on a forum somewhere, can't find it now.

However, they ask the girl if she has been coerced, trafficked etc. if she says yes then you are in deep, deep do do. You will end up in court.

I cannot accept that is the right info, or right thing to do. It just doesn't sit with me as it seems the first part contradicts the second, so I have asked this on the main forum

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=45565.0

[AnthG]

Looks like Stacey banned u from her competition on the other forum Holycrosser! It's the one u entered the competition. Apparently she won't accept your entry for lying about her 

I do not want to get in trouble myself with Amour, but where has Holycrosser bad mouthed, or lied about stacey/amour?

His posts on this thread e.g.

Missed that...........well if true thats the whole Amour credibility thing i gave them out the window and they seem the same as Diamonds, difficult to do much about it other than ask before booking now

Have been just personal worried conclusions based on what others have said, as he is panicking over getting caught with 2 girls in the flat. (which it seems is based on a situation of, if he is ever in a raid...life is over, so wants to minimise that chance to smallest as possible).

He hasn't been the one saying the things, he is just worrying over other people saying them?

The only other thing was this

She was on here yes and did get banned for fake reviews and offering fake compensation to the fake punter...i think

Which was just his memory of what he recalled happened which was over a year ago. It wasn't said maliciously, it was just his recollection.

[Toshiba]

Looks like Stacey banned u from her competition on the other forum Holycrosser! It's the one u entered the competition. Apparently she won't accept your entry for lying about her 

Looks like competitions are fixed anyway if that's any consolation Holycrosser 

Im totally gobsmacked at her response on the other forum, to suggest ive bad mouthed her is absurd, ive took care to try and be sympathetic to her and Amour, the only concern i then had was when she piped up on her site stating they dont allow girls to work together in one flat, this has been proved to be wrong and ive voiced concerns not only that it happens but also other agencies do it too.

She seems to throw her toys out the pram at criticism instead of putting it right.

Ive always put her agency and many if her workers in a great light in the main on here, i never insult her agency but i will have an opinion on the wrong stuff too, im a customer.

Unreal man

[Toshiba]

I do not want to get in trouble myself with Amour, but where has Holycrosser bad mouthed, or lied about stacey/amour?

His posts on this thread e.g.

Have been just personal worried conclusions based on what others have said, as he is panicking over getting caught with 2 girls in the flat. (which it seems is based on a situation of, if he is ever in a raid...life is over, so wants to minimise that chance to smallest as possible).

He hasn't been the one saying the things, he is just worrying over other people saying them?

The only other thing was this

Which was just his memory of what he recalled happened which was over a year ago. It wasn't said maliciously, it was just his recollection.

All true and thanks Anth, daft reaction tbh.maybe we have hit a nerve

[Jamessn]

Interesting reply to your post on the main board AnthG. Well done for posting it, interesting that there has not been a punter prosecuted, but there may be a first time.

I personally would not take the risk, escorts northeast has closed down, they were raided a few times last year. Now they have got rid of one agency they are bound to move onto another, I think Diamonds would be the likely target. But who knows.

There was another one last year closed down, run by an ex soldier, called escort dreams, I think, I can't remember now.

The police commissioner in Northumbria has a bee in her bonnet about prostitution being violence against women, so she is bound to keep up the pressure against agencies.

I am going to carry on being careful, no agency girls for me.

[AnthG]

There was another one last year closed down, run by an ex soldier, called escort dreams, I think, I can't remember now.

The one last year that was closed down. Reading the news it suggests no girls, or punters were prosecuted. Just the owner of the agency.

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

You get the feeling the reason why he was prosecuted was because he took the mick - having six girls all working all out of the one small flat he booked in a posh hotel all in his name. There is a thing called not being brazen about it.

[themademan2]

Looks like Stacey banned u from her competition on the other forum Holycrosser! It's the one u entered the competition. Apparently she won't accept your entry for lying about her 

Looks like competitions are fixed anyway if that's any consolation Holycrosser 

Strange, looks like admin from the other forum has edited the strand where u got banned from competition...

[Toshiba]

Strange, looks like admin from the other forum has edited the strand where u got banned from competition...

not really bothered, this is not all about Amour tbh, many agencies seem to do it...........it was pointed out, not by me, that Amour were also up to it seemingly, i still fail to see where ive bad mouthed them.

i defended them earlier as to how do they police indies working the same day as an agency girl, well thats for them to sort and you's to make the choice, you know my view and its not all about me 

[ProfessorYaffle]

Going by Anth's accurate definition of a brothel 39 of my 48 incall punts have been in flats/houses that fit the definition of a brothel - and of the 9 others, who were girls who generally work alone from their own flat, the majority of those girls participate in duos which may well have taken place at their flat, making them brothels as well.

The fact is that it's absolutely endemic in the NE punting scene (both agencies and indies) so it's unfair to single out a few girls / agencies.

It's particularly ironic that Amour have been the focus of this thread when they're the only local incall agency who are actively trying to put a stop to shared flats.

[greychap]

Im totally gobsmacked at her response on the other forum, to suggest ive bad mouthed her is absurd, ive took care to try and be sympathetic to her and Amour, the only concern i then had was when she piped up on her site stating they dont allow girls to work together in one flat, this has been proved to be wrong and ive voiced concerns not only that it happens but also other agencies do it too.

She seems to throw her toys out the pram at criticism instead of putting it right.

Ive always put her agency and many if her workers in a great light in the main on here, i never insult her agency but i will have an opinion on the wrong stuff too, im a customer.

Unreal man

It is totally wrong for Stacey to be having a go at holycrosser quite a few of us have said we don't like the 2 girl brothel situation. I for one only used Amour for incalls because I thought it  was a better situation then when Diamonds have 2 girls working the only difference is Diamonds are open about it and Stacey says it does not happen when many of the punters here have said it does.

Stacey should not be attacking her customers she should be trying to resolve the issue that she has been found out.

Also it shows that we should all have a different identity on here so we can be honest and voice our concerns without Amour going after individuals and banning them just because they have made a point of not wanting to do bookings with other girls and punters in the flat at the same time.

[greychap]

There has not been any punters prosecuted for just visiting a brothel as its not illegal but that does not mean you wont have trouble caused for you.

Depending what police force deals with it wether they go in hard or are more reasonable its all a gamble.

For example I knew of a guy that was there on a punt when the police turned up he was taken away from the girl separated from her questioned in different rooms for over an hour, he had to give his name and address, work address as he was at lunch time from work seeing the girl so they checked out that he worked there and got his car reg to check also and ran a check on him for warrants etc.

He did not get arrested but made to feel like a pervert and told people like him are taking advantage of the workers etc and they don't want to have to come across him again.

There was even an independent that used to work that never flat shared but had complaints and the police turned up with search warrant even though she said she worked for herself and nobody else was involved or pimping her but they treated her bad and told her to leave the area even though she kept saying I have not done nothing wrong. She decided to leave the flat because she was nervous and did not know what else to do.

Another incident I remember from ages ago I think was Kirsten of Newcastle one of the flats she was renting for work and she is independent by the way she got harassed by the police and I got told they started to stop a few of her punters and make trouble and this was all to do with people moaning about all the men visiting. From what I remember she ended up having to hire a criminal lawyer  to write a letter to the head of police for the constant picking on her when she was not running a brothel but just her working.

So each case and police visit could be totally a different experience depending who you get and what police force it is.

So the girls sharing bringing more attention to the flats is not what I want when I know if the police did turn up I would have to hand over all my details which I would rather avoid and as it is classed as a brothel they could take me down to the police station to help with there enquires where all I want is a nice relaxing time not be be involved in a 2 girl raid.

We should all be told if its 2 girls working out of a flat or not so we can decide wether to go ahead its our money after all.

[greychap]

Going by Anth's accurate definition of a brothel 39 of my 48 incall punts have been in flats/houses that fit the definition of a brothel - and of the 9 others, who were girls who generally work alone from their own flat, the majority of those girls participate in duos which may well have taken place at their flat, making them brothels as well.

The fact is that it's absolutely endemic in the NE punting scene (both agencies and indies) so it's unfair to single out a few girls / agencies.

It's particularly ironic that Amour have been the focus of this thread when they're the only local incall agency who are actively trying to put a stop to shared flats.

The reason Amour have been more focused on with this thread is the fact they made a point of saying no 2 girls are working at the same time in the same flat when they take an incall appointment  which many people on here have said that is not true they all seem to share flats at amour or most of them.

Diamonds do it but don't put on there website that they don't do it, we all know what we get with Diamonds that's why I chose to use Amour over Diamonds thinking there is not 2 girls in any of the flats so feel a bit tricked over it.

[Toshiba]

Going by Anth's accurate definition of a brothel 39 of my 48 incall punts have been in flats/houses that fit the definition of a brothel - and of the 9 others, who were girls who generally work alone from their own flat, the majority of those girls participate in duos which may well have taken place at their flat, making them brothels as well.

The fact is that it's absolutely endemic in the NE punting scene (both agencies and indies) so it's unfair to single out a few girls / agencies.

It's particularly ironic that Amour have been the focus of this thread when they're the only local incall agency who are actively trying to put a stop to shared flats.

how are they actively tying to stop it prof?

[greychap]

Here is the actual review thread where she was banned so you can see what exactly took place.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=19262

With regards to reviews on any agency websites. Never trust them. Take them with a huge pinch of salt. Always trust the reviews on this forum. And to be honest the same thing applies to pretty much any retailers website. Never trust the reviews they post, always look for independent reviews.

So with Stacey doing this kind of thing inventing fake punters and getting banned i should not really be surprised by her saying no 2 girls work from the flats. My estimations of Stacey have really gone down hill especially after Hollycrosser got mouthed off by her when all he did was just say he did not like the 2 girl flat share and some punters had said they had witnessed it when in bookings.

[greychap]

how are they actively tying to stop it prof?

The only thing they are trying to stop is us punters finding out that they operate just like Diamonds.

[ProfessorYaffle]

The reason Amour have been more focused on with this thread is the fact they made a point of saying no 2 girls are working at the same time in the same flat when they take an incall appointment  which many people on here have said that is not true they all seem to share flats at amour or most of them.

Diamonds do it but don't put on there website that they don't do it, we all know what we get with Diamonds that's why I chose to use Amour over Diamonds thinking there is not 2 girls in any of the flats so feel a bit tricked over it.

But Amour only posted that denial in response to this thread being started. Prior to that they didn't mention it at all, just like the other agencies don't.

As far as I'm aware it's only ever been a small number of their flats (3 that I know of) where more than 1 girl was working at the same time, and it's only started in the last 3-6 months. And one of those flats now only has 1 girl working from it.

[AnthG]

My estimations of Stacey have really gone down hill

The only thing they are trying to stop is us punters finding out that they operate just like Diamonds.

All I will say to offer balance, I personally still think she is by far the best agency owner in the UK. I say that sincerely too.

The two in a flat thing, I get the feeling she likely didn't know Cassie, Kia and Molly were doing it and behind closed doors is bollocking them for it too. There is no way she would admit it on her news page and apologise as she is then admitting running a brothel in writing that could be used against her. That's my thoughts at least.

[ProfessorYaffle]

how are they actively tying to stop it prof?

Almost all of the NE incall agencies use the same operating model, they have a bunch of permanent flats and different girls work from those flats each day.

Amour could do the same but haven't done so.

Many of their girls are outcall only, and those that do incalls work from their own flat that no-one else ever works from e.g. Amelia, Keeva, Mila.

Amour don't take bookings for incall duos.

IMO Stacey has her head screwed on and is trying to keep everything on the right side of the law.

There have only been a small number of their girls who have flat shared, and it has only started creeping in during the last 3-6 months as far as I'm aware. I imagine Stacey isn't very happy about it either.

[Toshiba]

All I will say to offer balance, I personally still think she is by far the best agency owner in the UK. I say that sincerely too.

The two in a flat thing, I get the feeling she likely didn't know Cassie, Kia and Molly were doing it and behind closed doors is bollocking them for it too. There is no way she would admit it on her news page and apologise as she is then admitting running a brothel in writing that could be used against her. That's my thoughts at least.

Anth ive emailed her with all our concerns and that our respinses were based on facts and fears, we werent slagging them off and said we were entitled to be concerned as a privacy issue, i pointed out she involved herself and others responded with sone truths.


Ive still had no reply, except a PM of a mod on another forum saying she had a point!

I await her response still.

[Toshiba]

Almost all of the NE incall agencies use the same operating model, they have a bunch of permanent flats and different girls work from those flats each day.

Amour could do the same but haven't done so.

Many of their girls are outcall only, and those that do incalls work from their own flat that no-one else ever works from e.g. Amelia, Keeva, Mila.

Amour don't take bookings for incall duos.

IMO Stacey has her head screwed on and is trying to keep everything on the right side of the law.

There have only been a small number of their girls who have flat shared, and it has only started creeping in during the last 3-6 months as far as I'm aware. I imagine Stacey isn't very happy about it either.

So if shes not very happy about it, how come she has gone on like she did, on another forum? And to say she knew nothing of it happening? Who the fuck sends out the addresses when you book the girls? Surely they know ffs if punters for 2 girls are being sent to the same address? Its the fact that its been denied and proved wrong that shes pissed off about so her toys sre being flung in my direction.

Had enough of the shit, i will find another agency to use .....they are all only interested in one thing dont forget £££££££££

We really dont matter too much, a simple reply of it wont be happening again and all of this shite could be avoided, ive tried my best to voice a concern for a lot of attached punters, it was never about a brothel/police thing with me , just a privacy thing i had.

Im done on the subject, you know my concerns and thats yhe end if my involvement on this.

[Trelf]

The reason Amour have been more focused on with this thread is the fact they made a point of saying no 2 girls are working at the same time in the same flat when they take an incall appointment  which many people on here have said that is not true they all seem to share flats at amour or most of them.

Thats a ridiculous generalization and fundamentally wrong.
I have used Amour on several occasions and there has NEVER been more than one girl in the flat/house.
I am sure if it has happened then it was without Staceys knowledge.
To say most of them are sharing is utter bullshit.

[ohfook1t]

As previously mentioned only a few are actually sharing flats. And we all know who they are

[ProfessorYaffle]

So if shes not very happy about it, how come she has gone on like she did, on another forum? And to say she knew nothing of it happening? Who the fuck sends out the addresses when you book the girls? Surely they know ffs if punters for 2 girls are being sent to the same address? Its the fact that its been denied and proved wrong that shes pissed off about so her toys sre being flung in my direction.

Had enough of the shit, i will find another agency to use .....they are all only interested in one thing dont forget £££££££££

We really dont matter too much, a simple reply of it wont be happening again and all of this shite could be avoided, ive tried my best to voice a concern for a lot of attached punters, it was never about a brothel/police thing with me , just a privacy thing i had.

Im done on the subject, you know my concerns and thats yhe end if my involvement on this.

You're airing her dirty linen in public, of course she's going to be upset.

[AnthG]

You're airing her dirty linen in public, of course she's going to be upset.

But that's not true though. It was themademan2 that did that. All Holycrosser did was he responded to themademan2's comments with "well if true thats the whole Amour credibility thing i gave them out the window"

He wasn't even saying it was true. Or agreeing with it. He just said he has been defending them in the thread and if its true he feels Amour will then be on a par with Diamonds then on it.

I do not want to get anyone in trouble with amour, but if Stacey is to be annoyed with anyone on this thread for airing dirty linen then its not Holycrosser for panicking over a comment someone else made.

If I was in a relationship with someone and had been booking with an agency on the belief I was safe as houses of not getting caught out. And then someone came along and said "nope for a couple of girls its not the case" I would panic big style too and I would react way more over the top that HC and do/say way more than just saying if its true I will now ask them on booking to confirm if the girls alone. (but that is just me, I am a panickier)

[MDB72]

This is a strange thread - it's seems to be taken that if you use an agency like amour then you will be involved in a police raid. Anyone who engages in this hobby has to make a risk assessment about a variety of factors. The chances of being involved in a raid are low but it is a possibility. If your not prepared to take that risk then don't participate in a punt. The odds are very low that anyone will be in the situation. It depends what risk you deem acceptable.

[greychap]

Thats a ridiculous generalization and fundamentally wrong.
I have used Amour on several occasions and there has NEVER been more than one girl in the flat/house.
I am sure if it has happened then it was without Staceys knowledge.
To say most of them are sharing is utter bullshit.

Ok not all girls are doing it but we know some are.

[smiths]

It seems lately a lot of 2 girls are working from incall flats at the same time.

I personally think when making a booking we should be told at the time if we are going in to a brothel, I know Diamonds seem to have a habbit of doing this but Amour go out of there way to say your sent to the place of one girl with one girl working when they have 2 girls from there agency doing incalls at the same time on the same day so in a way your being tricked, I don't think this is good for business.

I think Amour should tell us when we make a booking about who else will be in the flat on the day as this has happened with Eva, Lilly, Dionne and Cassie working at the same time.

If I go to see a escort on an incall I don't want to hear other men in the next room with another girl, and with 2 girls working from the flat and are busy all day that is a hell of a lot of punters coming and going through the door other people must notice the amount of men in and out.

Apart from it being illegal if the agencies what to do bookings like this at least tell us when we make a booking that there is more then 1 girl working from the building???

A premises is still a brothel if 1 WG works out of it BUT on another day another WG works out of it. If these premises are owned/leased/rented by an Agency they would be a brothel anyway. And the police WILL know its a brothel if its been established and advertising for a while and either raid it or not dependent on the attitude of the top cops in the area, an attitude that could change overnight. With POCA they could also decide to let the Agency operate for a while then raid it hoping to seize the pimps assets.

If smart an Agency will insist its WGs use their own premises or hotels so they can avoid getting done for running a brothel thus limiting their potential law breaking to controlling prostitutes for gain.

I agree with your point, the pimp should tell you there will be more than 1 WG in the premises working, i imagine they dont as they know that might put off some punters costing them business and getting punters money overrides anything else.

[greychap]

Thats a ridiculous generalization and fundamentally wrong.
I have used Amour on several occasions and there has NEVER been more than one girl in the flat/house.
I am sure if it has happened then it was without Staceys knowledge.
To say most of them are sharing is utter bullshit.

Without Stacey's knowledge have you actually read all this thread?

[greychap]

Non of you guys spotted it but Kia (now jenny) and Molly were both working out same place, one down as blaydon and the other down as swallwell (both actually working whickham same premises!). I knew as when I asked Molly for a shower, she said Kia was downstairs. Even greenman review for Kia originally stated that her friend answered door! So that confirms my info that the agency was having 2 working same place same time knowingly!

Trelf I am more likely to take this punters word and others on here then believe Stacey is the one right on this subject that it does not happen as they give out the addresses and the same address for 2 girls.

[greychap]

Plus after phoning Amour and just mentioning the 2 girl situation in a polite way to see what they said was told

 "This does not happen at Amour some people on ukp like to make up things to cause trouble they have nothing better to do and only have there computer to hide behind so please don't listen to any of it"

[smiths]

Almost all of the NE incall agencies use the same operating model, they have a bunch of permanent flats and different girls work from those flats each day.

Amour could do the same but haven't done so.

Many of their girls are outcall only, and those that do incalls work from their own flat that no-one else ever works from e.g. Amelia, Keeva, Mila.

Amour don't take bookings for incall duos.

IMO Stacey has her head screwed on and is trying to keep everything on the right side of the law.

There have only been a small number of their girls who have flat shared, and it has only started creeping in during the last 3-6 months as far as I'm aware. I imagine Stacey isn't very happy about it either.

What a VERY stupid operating model ensuring they could get done for running a brothel as well as controlling prostitutes for gain. Unlike a Parlour an Agency can avoid getting done for running a brothel and if smart the pimp would ensure the WGs use their own premises or hotels.

As to keeping the right side of the law, controlling prostitutes for gain is rightly or wrongly an offence, and thats what an Agency does so this pimp isnt trying to keep the right side of the law in reality, she is trying to limit her chances of getting nicked and having POCA and/or HMRC financially ruin her.

[alenski]

with regard to hebburn being likened to a house of ill repute i have this to say.each flat is regarded as a separate legal entity they receive their own electric and gas bills for example which means its no different to say entering hanover mill to see a girl at anyone of its numerous flats.since each girl is in their own legally separate flat this  means you are not entering  a brothel  but a big house which is sub-devided  into separate flats.each girl  could also claim to be working  quite independently of one another because under normal circumstances there is only one client in each flat.this was explained to me by one of the girls of course

[themademan2]

with regard to hebburn being likened to a house of ill repute i have this to say.each flat is regarded as a separate legal entity they receive their own electric and gas bills for example which means its no different to say entering hanover mill to see a girl at anyone of its numerous flats.since each girl is in their own legally separate flat this  means you are not entering  a brothel  but a big house which is sub-devided  into separate flats.each girl  could also claim to be working  quite independently of one another because under normal circumstances there is only one client in each flat.this was explained to me by one of the girls of course

Point taken, but each flat has at LEAST 2 lasses in!

My review of dirty dionne of adultwork proves it

[themademan2]

Plus after phoning Amour and just mentioning the 2 girl situation in a polite way to see what they said was told

 "This does not happen at Amour some people on ukp like to make up things to cause trouble they have nothing better to do and only have there computer to hide behind so please don't listen to any of it"

Shame she won't just run things the way she says she does

[AnthG]

Shame she won't just run things the way she says she does

Going way off topic here, but reading the reviews of the girls its been said its occurring with. It seems Kia and Molly are in a relationship together and are live in partners. As are Eva and Delphine in a relationship and live in partners.

With that then it just seems a bit off when Harriet Harmon (or whoever it was who invented this crazy law) didn't seem to factor in with her thinking of what about the scenario of gay women.

As its clear they were thinking 'we will only allow one person in the house to do this line of work, which seems reasonable as no way will the guy want to do this'. But they totally then didn't contemplate what if its a gay couple.

It just seems a bit off the law saying one girl in a relationship can do this, but the other cannot, of if she does she must find another premises to do it from than her own home where she is safe.