Yet another positive review of Sweet Monique

[d00fer]

Ignoring the understandable Westie bashing. I did say that the pic wasn't great and I didn't say that the pic is comparable to Michelle Pfeiffer. I do stand by my statement that the slight resemblance to Michelle Pfeiffer isn't a bad shout. Elaborating further it's Monique's smile and cheeks that I find most similar.

[ram2184]

kdd prices are higher but she is probably the only girl that offers that service at those rates..

[NightKid]

Given your high failure rate as a punter (as per your own reviews), I think we both know you have a serious problem.

Yup, my problem is having obviously higher standards than undercover fluffies like you ... and I'm immensely proud to hold myself accountable for that. 

[ram2184]

has anyone tried her anal?

is her ass tight?

[marty_mcfly]

Yup, my problem is having obviously higher standards than undercover fluffies like you ... and I'm immensely proud to hold myself accountable for that. 

I have had a look at your reviews. Yes, there are a higher proportion of negatives but not as high as it was made to sound as such. I agree that your negatives are justified based on the reasons given. In any case, such reviews should improve quality standards instead of unduly excessive praiseworthy reviews that are counter productive in terms of service standards and prices. In this respect I am guilty too, as my five reviews are over the top as well.

If a girl advertises deep french kissing and it turns out to be anything less than that, then it should be reported as such. The at discretion clause is an unfair advertising term because I doubt if most punters have bad breath or poor oral hygiene, so using this discretion is just an excuse in my opinion.

You have every right to be proud of your reviews, as they seem to be more truthful and accurate than all those fluffy reviews out there.

[Loveit]

Can I just clarify one thing about SW? One reviewer referred to her funny tummy and others have suggested she is more toned than previously. What is this all about? Has she stretch marks? Her main profile photo may give evidence to tummy marks but it is difficult to tell. I saw a girl the other day (review to follow) that looked perfect in her photos but in reality her tummy suggested she had given birth a dozen times although she denied having any children. Just put me off as I had built myself up to expect something far more perfect. I hate disappointment and it has a disproportionate affect on my libido.

[MrSmiley]

She's definitely been pregnant before. You can tell from looking up at her tummy. It's not obvious front on. Plus the fake tits.. She says she has no children. Maybe she doesn't anymore..

[droplet]

Does anyone know how old she is?

I shagged her long time ago when she first appeared on the scene. Quite interesting to see she is back. Not sure why she is back given what she told me.

My judgement is that she is something like late 20s-early 30s. Lots of stretched marks on the tummy. Very friendly girl at the time and new to the game. Not sure what she is like now.

[Sylvester]

I think it is something she is clearly uncomfortable talking about, and to be fair, I'm not sure it's really a legitimate topic of conversation unless it affects the punt. It seems a bit presumptuous to have a casual gossip about something that is a). Irrelevant and b). Hugely personal.

In my view her tummy, like the rest of her, is pretty fucking hot.  There are no marks that unduly influence the experience, and nothing is saggy or out of place.

Just my opinion, but I think a little respect gets you a very long way with girls...

[Loveit]

Of course it's legitimate to ask about a WG's appearance. I'm not proposing to ask her for a date or talk about her behind her back with friends or her work colleagues. I'm simply checking on the appearance and quality of the likely service before confirming a financial transaction that involves sex. I did not ask for the information in a rude or offensive manner. Don't be so fluffy. I'm greatful to those that provided helpful information so that I could make up my mind.

[Sylvester]

Of course it's legitimate to ask about a WG's appearance. I'm not proposing to ask her for a date or talk about her behind her back with friends or her work colleagues. I'm simply checking on the appearance and quality of the likely service before confirming a financial transaction that involves sex. I did not ask for the information in a rude or offensive manner. Don't be so fluffy. I'm greatful to those that provided helpful information so that I could make up my mind.

Why do you assume I'm referring to you?

Of course it's legitimate to enquire about appearance.  I just felt that subsequent posts speculating, a bit less so, that's all.

[Sylvester]

In fact, just ignore me. Put it down to a Spectacular Sunday Hangover...

[onedivergent]

FANTASTIC POST. I LOVE IT. These dickheads probably think that flattery will get them perks from the escort concerned. Maybe Monique will give these sick guys special complimentary services such as Anal and Swallowing.

That was my plan  but I wasn't intending to see girls in there twenties !
Coz i've seen her 3 times told west 8 to see her and she's the nearest age WG to me that I've ever seen. I said she should put her rates up ! why not ?!  There's enough demand for her and now at £120 that's reasonable .
And I am a sick guy coz that means cool and awesome so there haha 
Let individual s decide but £120 for awesome service is super fair and she's super sweet !

[west8]

Yup, my problem is having obviously higher standards than undercover fluffies like you ... and I'm immensely proud to hold myself accountable for that. 

The only thing fluffy on here is the vapid matter between your lugholes. If you think I'm a fluff, you need to go back to post #1.

Your reviews are well-written, I will grant you that. But as I have said to others, a statistically high failure rate when anyone has this fine forum for guidance speaks as much about the punter as about the girls under review.

Take from that whatever you wish. Or take nothing from it.

[NightKid]

The only thing fluffy on here is the vapid matter between your lugholes. If you think I'm a fluff, you need to go back to post #1.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I've mentioned before that I shave that spot. So no, not even a shred of fluff there. 

As for you ... I don't think you are, I know you are. The entire thread is testament to it, and I notice you don't deny being the one who advised her to put her prices up either.
How sad is it for you, that even a ringpiece is less fluffier than you are? 

But as I have said to others, a statistically high failure rate when anyone has this fine forum for guidance speaks as much about the punter as about the girls under review.

Yup, because 6 negatives out of 20 punts (30%) is "high failure rate". And seeing as 5 out of those 6 negs were TOFTT punts, I really could've used this fine forum for guidance. 

Dumbass. 

[marty_mcfly]

That was my plan  but I wasn't intending to see girls in there twenties !
Coz i've seen her 3 times told west 8 to see her and she's the nearest age WG to me that I've ever seen. I said she should put her rates up ! why not ?! There's enough demand for her and now at £120 that's reasonable .
And I am a sick guy coz that means cool and awesome so there haha 
Let individual s decide but £120 for awesome service is super fair and she's super sweet !

Yes, you are sick. Truly sick to tell someone to increase prices. Do you do that at Tescos too? Wait, I isn't ASDA a little cheaper, so go to ASDA and advise them.

If you feel that £120 is too low and that she should be charging say £140, then why don't you tip her the extra £20 to make up the difference? Just because you want to pay extra doesn't mean you should enforce higher prices on others. All this is irrelevant of course, if you are her pimp, which you sound like.

[marty_mcfly]

The only thing fluffy on here is the vapid matter between your lugholes. If you think I'm a fluff, you need to go back to post #1.

Your reviews are well-written, I will grant you that. But as I have said to others, a statistically high failure rate when anyone has this fine forum for guidance speaks as much about the punter as about the girls under review.

Take from that whatever you wish. Or take nothing from it.

Incorrect. It is not a high failure rate but the lack of high satisfaction rate from the punter's point of view. There is nothing wrong with having a high standard compared to all the fluffies in here.

As for this forum, its ethos clearly states the following:

"This site puts the interests of punters first".

If punters have a high standard and expectation then this is exactly what this site seeks to offer them.

Also, in with the objective of this site, all those pathetic morons who suggest to SPs to increase their prices are against the basic code of this site and are acting against the interests of punters.

As for fluffies, they are nothing but touts, which again are against the principles of this site. I am afraid West8, you are one big fluffy who is always happy at any level of service he receives at less than £250 per hour.

[marty_mcfly]

. Lots of stretched marks on the tummy.

Guess what, I just saw a picture of Michelle Pfeiffer's tummy, she has identical stretch marks!

[lewishamguy]

Guess what, I just saw a picture of Michelle Pfeiffer's tummy, she has identical stretch marks!

Ah I see so Monique resembles 56yrs old Michelle Pfeiffer rather than her stated profile age 26? 

[west8]

Incorrect. It is not a high failure rate but the lack of high satisfaction rate from the punter's point of view. There is nothing wrong with having a high standard compared to all the fluffies in here.

<snip>

As for fluffies, they are nothing but touts, which again are against the principles of this site. I am afraid West8, you are one big fluffy who is always happy at any level of service he receives at less than £250 per hour.

A 'lack of high satisfaction' rate? That has to be the poorest excuse for making successive bad choices I have ever read on here. Grow up. You do your research and you make your choice. Either that research is systematically flawed or the punter concerned needs to start afresh.

I have met more than 50 AW girls, each and every one selected after studying this forum and speaking by PM with those who have met some of the girls concerned. I also check Google, etc for further pertinent information before deciding, on the balance of probabilities, if the risk/reward ratio meets my highly selective criteria.

Now, of course your interpretation would be that a higher negative review rate for a punter would be due to him having met poorly performing WGs. You might be correct in that over simplistic assumption.

But you miss one key point: the punter in question had to choose, book and meet the girl in question BEFORE he received any kind of service.

Therefore, the notion that a certain punter can't possibly be to blame for his bad experiences is a nonsense. Once or twice = unfortunate. Three or four times = extraordinary bad luck. Five or six times = glutton for punishment.

A higher failure rate than that says only one thing: the person making the choices is a bit simple.

[NightKid]

But you miss one key point: the punter in question had to choose, book and meet the girl in question BEFORE he received any kind of service.

Therefore, the notion that a certain punter can't possibly be to blame for his bad experiences is a nonsense. Once or twice = unfortunate. Three or four times = extraordinary bad luck. Five or six times = glutton for punishment.

Ah, so we've now progressed to the 'never had a bad punt' stage, have we? 

Thanks for saving me the effort of having to dig for that one, and keep the exposés coming.

[west8]

Ah, so we've now progressed to the 'never had a bad punt' stage, have we? 

Thanks for saving me the effort of having to dig for that one, and keep the exposés coming.

The word 'never' was not in my post above, but we both know how you enjoy selectively quoting out of context. I've had bad punts. We've all bad punts. But very few have had as many bad punts as you seem to have had. No prizes for guessing why that could be.

Whilst you're busy trolling, I'm still waiting for you to admit your error in blaming me for Lexi's price increase. You know, the price increase that never actually happened.

But hey, we both know a sneaky little earthworm like you isn't man enough to stand up and admit you were wrong.

[NightKid]

The word 'never' was not in my post above ...

Edit: But that's exactly what you're insinuating.

I've had bad punts. We've all bad punts. But very few have had as many bad punts as you seem to have had.

Seem odd that many other experienced punters seem to contradict what you're saying then, doesn't it? 

Whilst you're busy trolling, I'm still waiting for you to admit your error in blaming me for Lexi's price increase. You know, the price increase that never actually happened.

The price increase was in effect the moment you forced her to accept £120 when she insisted on £110, you dolt. 

Are you seriously as dumb as you sound?

[west8]

The price increase was in effect the moment you forced her to accept £120 when she insisted on £110, you dolt. 

Are you seriously as dumb as you sound?

1. How could I 'force' her to accept the rate at which I booked her, prior to meeting her? Come on, we've all been waiting for the answer to that question as you have avoided it on every thread you jumped to in order to troll about price increases.

Hidden Image/Members Only

There's the proof, where's your explanation?


2. No, but you most certainly are. See above.

[NightKid]

1. How could I 'force' her to accept the rate at which I booked her, prior to meeting her? Come on, we've all been waiting for the answer to that question as you have avoided it on every thread you jumped to in order to troll about price increases.

Hidden Image/Members Only

There's the proof, where's your explanation?

Reading fail conveniently kicking in again?

I probably should have mentioned in my Lexi review that there was a brief disagreement about the fee. She insisted her stated rate was £110 when I knew it to be £120.

She begrudgingly accepted the 120, but has since confirmed that her rate is indeed 120.

[west8]

Reading fail conveniently kicking in again?

No, but yours clearly is. Her rate when she joined Adultwork was £120.

When the first reviewer on here met her, it was £120.

When every subsequent reviewer met her, it was £120.

If only your IQ was 120 you would be able to see that ...

[NightKid]

When the first reviewer on here met her, it was £120.

 

1hr @ £110

No idea why it was £110, just called her and asked her how much and that's what she said.

But it wasn't the amount that he paid, which makes all the difference in the world.
And instead of doing something sensible like telling her to correct her advertised rate to £110 if she's insisting on it, you just had to encourage Lexi to do otherwise.

[west8]

You're doing it again. Quoting out of context.

The first reviewer was fortunate. He underpaid as she had previously worked last year for £110 and made a genuine error. It's testament to what a sincere girl she is that she graciously accepted the original reviewer's £110. Many girls would have pointed out the error and asked for the 'extra' £10.

As _Busty Lexi_, her rate was £120 from the date the profile was created.

I contacted her the moment I spotted her after the first review on here by che_666999 and the rate on her profile was 120.

Now, could you please explain how I was able to tell her to increase her rate if her rate (as per her profile) was £120 when I booked. The proof is above.

The answer is that you can't explain it. Because it never happened. I booked through Adultwork and the rate is automatically inserted into the box when you select incall or outcall and the duration of the booking.

Which is precisely why it stated 120 - and precisely why I paid her £120.

[Jason]

Back on topic after the derailing...

Does anyone know how old she is? My judgement is that she is something like late 20s-early 30s.

I estimate that she is 28±1 i.e. 27-29y.o. For the record profile says 26 y.o. so at least 26.

As for her looks the black and white picture posted above is unflattering. She looks better in the flesh. As for a numerical score of her actual looks according to my own beauty scale (version 2.0), which you can see External Link/Members Only I classify her as cute and I give her a face score of 7.8/10 ---8.0/10 at her best. As for famous look-alikes I would say she looks like an older version (10 year older) of Chloe Moretz as in External Link/Members Only. Chloe is 18y.o. by the way. I would say the resemblance is 55%-60%. Eyes, nose, chin are quite similar. Face shape too but Monique's is a bit more oblong.The resemblance with a young Michelle Pfeiffer is much lower imho like 20-25% or so - eyes and nose have some similarity but not as much as Chloe's. Anyway, that is the facial analysis / overanalysis that I would have done if I had bothered to post my own review about Monique.

[ram2184]

Back on topic after the derailing...I estimate that she is 28±1 i.e. 27-29y.o. For the record profile says 26 y.o. so at least 26.

As for her looks the black and white picture posted above is unflattering. She looks better in the flesh. As for a numerical score of her actual looks according to my own beauty scale (version 2.0), which you can see External Link/Members Only I classify her as cute and I give her a face score of 7.8/10 ---8.0/10 at her best. As for famous look-alikes I would say she looks like an older version (10 year older) of Chloe Moretz as in External Link/Members Only. Chloe is 18y.o. by the way. I would say the resemblance is 55%-60%. Eyes, nose, chin are quite similar. Face shape too but Monique's is a bit more oblong.The resemblance with a young Michelle Pfeiffer is much lower imho like 20-25% or so - eyes and nose have some similarity but not as much as Chloe's. Anyway, that is the facial analysis / overanalysis that I would have done if I had bothered to post my own review about Monique.

how was her service? does she provide pay for companionship service like dinner dates?

[Jason]

does she provide pay for companionship service like dinner dates?

Keep provoking me troll. I will only tell you this. When this thread will be read in the future, you will have a “banned” below your stolen nickname and a banning reason below your trolling post. Have a look at the history of my posts here you will see that several members like you attempted to be sarcastic with me in a trolling way. They ALL have “banned” under their nicknames; it looks like a head stone in a graveyard. So keep having the first laugh. Have the middle as well if you like. I am more than certain I will have the last. And I will certainly enjoy pissing on your grave. I am sure I pissed on your previous grave anyway. Abdul incarnation

[ram2184]

Keep provoking me troll. I will only tell you this. When this thread will be read in the future, you will have a “banned” below your stolen nickname and a banning reason below your trolling post. Have a look at the history of my posts here you will see that several members like you attempted to be sarcastic with me in a trolling way. They ALL have “banned” under their nicknames; it looks like a head stone in a graveyard. So keep having the first laugh. Have the middle as well if you like. I am more than certain I will have the last. And I will certainly enjoy pissing on your grave. I am sure I pissed on your previous grave anyway. Abdul incarnation

dude i am not abdul or sergei.. i was just asking did you go for the dinner dates with prossie? what are the charges the same amount or half the price?

If you read dani(WG) she inform us that good ladies cut their prices half for paid for companionship services like dinner dates(i assume walk in the parks, going to clubs would be the same as well). reason i shared was because i wanted you to know the rates for such services(and other who likes those sort of arrangements). i just wanted to help share information with you jason so that you are aware of the ongoing rates.

anyway dani mentioned it in this thread :- https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=51021.0

[mrhappypants]

Back on topic after the derailing...I estimate that she is 28±1 i.e. 27-29y.o. For the record profile says 26 y.o. so at least 26.

As for her looks the black and white picture posted above is unflattering. She looks better in the flesh. As for a numerical score of her actual looks according to my own beauty scale (version 2.0), which you can see External Link/Members Only I classify her as cute and I give her a face score of 7.8/10 ---8.0/10 at her best. As for famous look-alikes I would say she looks like an older version (10 year older) of Chloe Moretz as in External Link/Members Only. Chloe is 18y.o. by the way. I would say the resemblance is 55%-60%. Eyes, nose, chin are quite similar. Face shape too but Monique's is a bit more oblong.The resemblance with a young Michelle Pfeiffer is much lower imho like 20-25% or so - eyes and nose have some similarity but not as much as Chloe's. Anyway, that is the facial analysis / overanalysis that I would have done if I had bothered to post my own review about Monique.

Jason, thanks putting the post back on track and for your thoughts and opinion on her attractiveness - always difficult to gauge with any degree of objectivity. For the record, during our meeting I asked myself who she reminded me of - which is how I came up with the description. 

I have had another experience, of recognising someone famous (Daniel Craig), and that other people found it IMPOSSIBLE to identify that, yes, it was actually him. This makes me think there is wide variation between individuals in the way they code and associate faces. 

I would come up with a different order if I were ranking the faces in your scale -like I said; difficult.  I use the rule of thumb that I rate facial appearance a seven to mean cute (sweet Chantelle) eight to mean pretty (stunning Julie, xAleksandrax) and nine to describe girls my eye is irrisitable drawn to (Mel).   Hence my rating is higher than yours, but not as high as West8's. 

Dave

[west8]

Chloe Moretz is a good call, but I think she's a little chubbier than Monique, who also has a more prominent jawline.

Either way, given all her publicity on here recently, I think most have a good idea of what to expect: a fit Polish WG with a pretty face.

[lewishamguy]

Keep provoking me troll. I will only tell you this. When this thread will be read in the future, you will have a “banned” below your stolen nickname and a banning reason below your trolling post. Have a look at the history of my posts here you will see that several members like you attempted to be sarcastic with me in a trolling way. They ALL have “banned” under their nicknames; it looks like a head stone in a graveyard. So keep having the first laugh. Have the middle as well if you like. I am more than certain I will have the last. And I will certainly enjoy pissing on your grave. I am sure I pissed on your previous grave anyway. Abdul incarnation

Considering his arselicking posts I pointed out in another thread he who might be a previously banned troll .

 

[mrhappypants]

So if you are still here after the last four pages this is by way of an update based on a second visit.

Appearance

So with a chance to check my original description I am going to disagree with recent commentary by Intpro and Jason.  My view was and remains that Monique is beautiful in a Michelle Pfeiffer style.  This is not to say that you might mistake her for MF - you wouldn't.  Rather if you think MF is attractive you will like her looks.  Like wise I rate her as more attractive than the girls at 8.0 and 8.4 on Jason's revised rating scale. I also think Intpro overrates her physical attractiveness - though she has a pretty body no doubt.

On a second visit she again missed the dress and service request.  This is obvious really;  S street is a well known nocking shop and all the calls and texts are handled by the maid.  She did not say this exactly but it is what I think based on past experience at S... Street.  So that means it's pretty uncertain she will meet a dress or service request.

Finally, the music in the room and her taste is good I think, and helped the mood.

Dave

[west8]

So if you are still here after the last four pages this is by way of an update based on a second visit.

Appearance

So with a chance to check my original description I am going to disagree with recent commentary by Intpro and Jason.  My view was and remains that Monique is beautiful in a Michelle Pfeiffer style.  This is not to say that you might mistake her for MF - you wouldn't.  Rather if you think MF is attractive you will like her looks.  Like wise I rate her as more attractive than the girls at 8.0 and 8.4 on Jason's revised rating scale. I also think Intpro overrates her physical attractiveness - though she has a pretty body no doubt.

On a second visit she again missed the dress and service request.  This is obvious really;  S street is a well known nocking shop and all the calls and texts are handled by the maid.  She did not say this exactly but it is what I think based on past experience at S... Street.  So that means it's pretty uncertain she will meet a dress or service request.

Finally, the music in the room and her taste is good I think, and helped the mood.

Dave

Nice one Dave. I think you would agree that a good indicator of a girls service and attitude is her 'returnability factor'. That face does it for me and it's the primary reason I have to return. Yes, she's also a sweet girl, but the face trumps that.

Shame there aren't more VFM girls that can give head as well as Monique.

[mrhappypants]

Westie, entirely agree.

Dave