Q's first ever "walk" - Chloe Kisses - Mother-In-Law-Experience

[GBush]

To bring some balance;

1. Yes there is hyperbole for the sake of effect in Q's review and his posts.
2. Yes he is drawing attention to the issue as it feeds his ego.
3. He seems genuinely pissed off about the deceptive nature of the WG promo pics and the fact that he wasted valuable time, effort and excitement on a B&S scammer.
4. I for one was taken in by the website picks and was considering my first MILF punt. (FFS)
5. I have subsequently been provided a face photo by the WG and I was shocked rigid.
6. I communicated to the WG that she did indeed look 55.
7. Is not the purpose of UKP to route out the excellent WG's and expose the frauds, cheats, B&S, poor providers.
8. Has this been made more "personal" because the woman in question was a contributor on UKE - yes. It makes the B&S more dissapointing if you have exchanged some banter. This is not some trafficked Romanian we are talking about.

All just my "two penneth"

[mattylondon]

To bring some balance;

1. Yes there is hyperbole for the sake of effect in Q's review and his posts.
2. Yes he is drawing attention to the issue as it feeds his ego.
3. He seems genuinely pissed off about the deceptive nature of the WG promo pics and the fact that he wasted valuable time, effort and excitement on a B&S scammer.
4. I for one was taken in by the website picks and was considering my first MILF punt. (FFS)
5. I have subsequently been provided a face photo by the WG and I was shocked rigid.
6. I communicated to the WG that she did indeed look 55.
7. Is not the purpose of UKP to route out the excellent WG's and expose the frauds, cheats, B&S, poor providers.
8. Has this been made more "personal" because the woman in question was a contributor on UKE - yes. It makes the B&S more dissapointing if you have exchanged some banter. This is not some trafficked Romanian we are talking about.

All just my "two penneth"

Good post and well summed up, in my opinion.

I've never seen so much fuss generated about an old looking woman, way past her sell by date. She must be lapping all this publicity up, whilst still feigning to be offended. Plenty of people have booked her, including members on here who I trust and have testified that she provided a good service. I don't doubt it.

For me, however, that isn't the point. Putting pictures out there, lying about your dress size and so on, is an attempt to deceive and fuck punters over. Service providers like this woman know very well that there are plenty of men, who when faced with the stark reality, won't walk for many reasons. Fear of causing offence, embarrassment or let's face it, their greater desire to unload their balls into anything which has a pulse.. even a middle aged, obese woman. Any port in a storm theory.

I think that some men need to grow a pair and simply walk. However, it does appear a little odd that this reviewer stuck around long enough to snog her not once but twice before being asked for the cash? I get the feeling that he was grabbing as much as he could before he had to part with his £300 odd quid! And if he did and had no intention of going through with it, he was a little out of order himself, in my opinion because he gave this woman the wrong impression. And btw, ditching this fatty to go with somebody who you've only punted once before doesn't constitute falling back on a 'regular'? That's a load of bollocks.

[Belgarion]

Good post and well summed up, in my opinion.

I've never seen so much fuss generated about an old looking woman, way past her sell by date. She must be lapping all this publicity up, whilst still feigning to be offended. Plenty of people have booked her, including members on here who I trust and have testified that she provided a good service. I don't doubt it.

For me, however, that isn't the point. Putting pictures out there, lying about your dress size and so on, is an attempt to deceive and fuck punters over. Service providers like this woman know very well that there are plenty of men, who when faced with the stark reality, won't walk for many reasons. Fear of causing offence, embarrassment or let's face it, their greater desire to unload their balls into anything which has a pulse.. even a middle aged, obese woman. Any port in a storm theory.

I think that some men need to grow a pair and simply walk. However, it does appear a little odd that this reviewer stuck around long enough to snog her not once but twice before being asked for the cash? I get the feeling that he was grabbing as much as he could before he had to part with his £300 odd quid! And if he did and had no intention of going through with it, he was a little out of order himself, in my opinion because he gave this woman the wrong impression. And btw, ditching this fatty to go with somebody who you've only punted once before doesn't constitute falling back on a 'regular'? That's a load of bollocks.

Pretty sure the review only has one snog in it.

[Quesadilla]

Really don't see any way admitting to being b&s'd is feeding my ego. On the contrary I originally told Admin I really didn't want to review as I was embarrassed to admit booking her having seen B&G's review.

Chloe backed me into a corner by "outing" our meet and making it out to look like there was something untoward on my side - leaving me no choice but to review and put my side forward

So yes forgive me for feeling rather indignant that this sad old woman is attacking my reputation and credibility and for being just a little like a dog with a mouldy old bone about it.

As far as I'm concerned the key point of my review remains and is totally NOT exaggerated. This was a bait and switch and the worst I've ever experienced. Chloe bears no resemblence to the pics on her profile and website and effectively tried to rip me off.

If you want to prove me wrong book her yourself and fill your boots. I look forward to your review.

[GBush]

If you want to prove me wrong book her yourself and fill your boots. I look forward to your review.

Can't say fairer than that. 

You saved me making that mistake. I would have walked but it's an effort to sort out a punt and I don't have you extensive back catalogue of regular girls to fall back on for a Plan B. So I would have been left pissed off and frustrated.

Anyone is free to book this SP and then give us your comments after.

[cockneybstrd]

So yes forgive me for feeling rather indignant that this sad old woman is attacking my reputation and credibility and for being just a little like a dog with a mouldy old bone about it.

What reputation and credibility ??

I dont think any of her attacks have changed my opinion of you. I had you down as snide cunt already. So the ravings of an OAP wont change that

And MattyLondon nice too see you posting again !

[squeezebox]

Really don't see any way admitting to being b&s'd is feeding my ego. On the contrary I originally told Admin I really didn't want to review as I was embarrassed to admit booking her having seen B&G's review.

Chloe backed me into a corner by "outing" our meet and making it out to look like there was something untoward on my side - leaving me no choice but to review and put my side forward

So yes forgive me for feeling rather indignant that this sad old woman is attacking my reputation and credibility and for being just a little like a dog with a mouldy old bone about it.

As far as I'm concerned the key point of my review remains and is totally NOT exaggerated. This was a bait and switch and the worst I've ever experienced. Chloe bears no resemblence to the pics on her profile and website and effectively tried to rip me off.

If you want to prove me wrong book her yourself and fill your boots. I look forward to your review.

The reviews on UKP reflect a more robust interpretation of someone's personal experience. In some, others can find a WG pretty and others say she looks more ordinary..etc. In this instance, Chloe used older pictures of herself to "bait" a booking and the result was Q walking as he wasn't happy....although got a good snog for his troubles. There was no "switch" as it was her that was present for the booking.

To her credit, she hasn't denied it, just got on with things and has started to change her pictures to reflect a more up to-date appearance. Many have said, there is a market for MILF bookings, so it's just a question of re-aligning the marketing accordingly.

[vw]

What reputation and credibility ??

I dont think any of her attacks have changed my opinion of you. I had you down as snide cunt already.

And MattyLondon nice too see you posting again !

+10000000000000000

I'm just shocked he never won WOTW

[greychap]

Really don't see any way admitting to being b&s'd is feeding my ego. On the contrary I originally told Admin I really didn't want to review as I was embarrassed to admit booking her having seen B&G's review.

Chloe backed me into a corner by "outing" our meet and making it out to look like there was something untoward on my side - leaving me no choice but to review and put my side forward

So yes forgive me for feeling rather indignant that this sad old woman is attacking my reputation and credibility and for being just a little like a dog with a mouldy old bone about it.

As far as I'm concerned the key point of my review remains and is totally NOT exaggerated. This was a bait and switch and the worst I've ever experienced. Chloe bears no resemblence to the pics on her profile and website and effectively tried to rip me off.

If you want to prove me wrong book her yourself and fill your boots. I look forward to your review.

There is obviously some that think it was a plan for you to see her to get you back on UKP as you know that some on here did not like her.

So you have not boasted to her or anything on emails or texts etc saying you are good at ruining girls and report lots of girls to AW all the time and  make them reduce there prices to £90 for the hour?

[yorkshire123]

So you have not boasted to her or anything on emails or texts etc saying you are good at ruining girls and report lots of girls to AW all the time and  make them reduce there prices to £90 for the hour?

That's one hell of an accusation to make mate!

To be honest its all getting a little bit childish, punter walks due to a picture bait & writes a negative. Nice one
But deems it necessary to link future reviews to the negative with no real connection, why?

Prossie has a walk off, it happens but deems it necessary to tell the whole of UKE who it was (why?) & continues to snipe whenever the opportunity arises.

[greychap]

That's one hell of an accusation to make mate!

To be honest its all getting a little bit childish, punter walks due to a picture bait & writes a negative. Nice one
But deems it necessary to link future reviews to the negative with no real connection, why?

Prossie has a walk off, it happens but deems it necessary to tell the whole of UKE who it was (why?) & continues to snipe whenever the opportunity arises.

Its not my accusation mate but thought I would say it as that is what is being said behind the scenes and not sure but think something might be getting sent to admin regarding it, not from me  though but just thought I would mention what was being said, but anyway its not really to do with me anyway

[GBush]

The reviews on UKP reflect a more robust interpretation of someone's personal experience. In some, others can find a WG pretty and others say she looks more ordinary..etc. In this instance, Chloe used older pictures of herself to "bait" a booking and the result was Q walking as he wasn't happy....although got a good snog for his troubles. There was no "switch" as it was her that was present for the booking.

To her credit, she hasn't denied it, just got on with things and has started to change her pictures to reflect a more up to-date appearance. Many have said, there is a market for MILF bookings, so it's just a question of re-aligning the marketing accordingly.

Happy to retract the B&S.  My misunderstanding of the term. She baited punters and potential punters with her marketing material that bore no resemblance to the actual product in its' current condition. 

[vw]

Happy to retract the B&S.  My misunderstanding of the term. She baited punters and potential punters with her marketing material that bore no resemblance to the actual product in its' current condition.

I've seen it all now white knighting a tortilla chip ?   

[GBush]

I've seen it all now white knighting a tortilla chip ?   

Fuck off VW ............................... actually I retract that ..................... I have no idea what you are talking about.

Am I White Knighting Q????????  Fuck me.

Am I white Knighting the SP 'cos technicall, apparently it was only bait and not bait and switch,  It's still her ......... just in a parallel universe

Anyway, play nice, I've hurt my back and I'm on some awesome pain killers 

[greychap]

Fuck off VW ............................... actually I retract that ..................... I have no idea what you are talking about.

Am I White Knighting Q????????  Fuck me.

Am I white Knighting the SP 'cos technicall, apparently it was only bait and not bait and switch,  It's still her ......... just in a parallel universe

Anyway, play nice, I've hurt my back and I'm on some awesome pain killers 

Not sure its a classed as a bait and switch but yes she put on a bit of weight.

[Cuntminion]

attacking my reputation and credibility

Hidden Image/Members Only

[vw]

Hidden Image/Members Only

Attacking this guys credibility is like shadow boxing at night !

[Atticus Finch]

This just seems to have degenerated into the usual suspects having a pop - whatever the original reason it has long been forgotten in the ensuing circle-jerk.

Q may have his idiosyncrasies, as do we all - I for one am not a fan of review titles written in the third person for instance, but his body of reviews is second to none, particularly by comparison with the reviews of the chief pisstakers here, and even more particularly the reviews he has posted warning other punters of the perils that lay out there...

I think people have genuinely lost the plot if they are going to start slating reviewers for posting negatives reviews.

And for what's it's worth, Quesadilla has infinitely more credibility as a punter than you Comaminion.  I really, really mean that.

 

[Cuntminion]

This just seems to have degenerated into the usual suspects having a pop - whatever the original reason it has long been forgotten in the ensuing circle-jerk.

Q may have his idiosyncrasies, as do we all - I for one am not a fan of review titles written in the third person for instance, but his body of reviews is second to none, particularly by comparison with the reviews of the chief pisstakers here, and even more particularly the reviews he has posted warning other punters of the perils that lay out there...

I think people have genuinely lost the plot if they are going to start slating reviewers for posting negatives reviews.

And for what's it's worth, Quesadilla has infinitely more credibility as a punter than you Comaminion.  I really, really mean that.

 

Your opinion on my credibility means nothing to me 
I'm not seeking to gain credibility in fact I couldn't give a fuck

Point in question I don't give a monkeys if someone drops a negative their experience their opinion as mentioned I only felt compelled to respond as he repeatedly linked in reviews I was genuinely interested in on the London board, this has been noticed by others and the general impression is its bitter and petty

The only two points I commented on where the age and size claims as I have seen enough to convince me its grossly exaggerated on reviewers side

Something I did not even take into account and was picked up on by someone else in a prior comment was that he hung around long enough for a snog and pleasantries which rightly acknowledged any one would of been decent and walked as soon as they had seen the wg was not for them

So not only do I now feel its and exaggeration but I also get a strong hint of purposely orchestrating parts of this experience for dramatic effect on his part

[Atticus Finch]

Your opinion on my credibility means nothing to me 
I'm not seeking to gain credibility in fact I couldn't give a fuck

Point in question I don't give a monkeys if someone drops a negative their experience their opinion as mentioned I only felt compelled to respond as he repeatedly linked in reviews I was genuinely interested in on the London board, this has been noticed by others and the general impression is its bitter and petty

The only two points I commented on where the age and size claims as I have seen enough to convince me its grossly exaggerated on reviewers side

Something I did not even take into account and was picked up on by someone else in a prior comment was that he hung around long enough for a snog and pleasantries which rightly acknowledged any one would of been decent and walked as soon as they had seen the wg was not for them

So not only do I now feel its and exaggeration but I also get a strong hint of purposely orchestrating parts of this experience for dramatic effect on his part

You chose to post one of your endlessly entertaining GIFs attacking Quesadilla's reputation and credibility.  My comments were in relation to that, and the fact that I far a lot of respect for Q's reviews.  You, by comparison, are in a very weak position to be attacking him on those grounds.

With respect to you satisfying yourself that Q has been exaggerating about Chloe's age and size, given that the fact he says her pictures are not representative of her current appearance, how have you managed to satisfy yourself without actually meeting her?

This is where relative credibility becomes important.  I am far more likely to accept Q's version of events, because he has demonstrated his worth as a reviewer many times over, while you have not and are just expressing a contrary opinion, as is your way.

[Kingy28]

AW profile now has age 44. Dress size 16 & some gallery pics have now been removed

[broksonic]

I don't believe for one nano second that she is a size 20 plus , and in her mid 50's. 

[Quesadilla]

...In this instance, Chloe used older pictures of herself to "bait" a booking and the result was Q walking as he wasn't happy....although got a good snog for his troubles. There was no "switch" as it was her that was present for the booking.

Have to disagree terms. The lady I met was NOT the lady in the pictures. It may have been her 10-15 years ago but now bears no resemblance. So she baited me with a younger attractive version of herself and switched with an old ugly woman. 

I can fully respect/appreciate if you feel my definition of bait and switch doesn't tally with yours but we will agree to differ.  When someone is so far from the pictures she uses - regardless who the pics are of - to me it's a b&s and always will be. 

There was nothing good about the snog - she literally grabbed me before I could even think.  I am genuinely a gentleman so did my best not to throw up or run for the door but still needed a minute to get my wits back as I was genuinely in shock. Before I could figure out what to do she snogged me a second time but my lips were sealed.  She then realised I was pulling back and immediately asked for the cash.  A younger, less experienced me would have handed over the cash almost by reflex which is what I am sure she was counting on.

[Quesadilla]

This just seems to have degenerated into the usual suspects having a pop - whatever the original reason it has long been forgotten in the ensuing circle-jerk.

Q may have his idiosyncrasies, as do we all - I for one am not a fan of review titles written in the third person for instance, but his body of reviews is second to none, particularly by comparison with the reviews of the chief pisstakers here, and even more particularly the reviews he has posted warning other punters of the perils that lay out there...

I think people have genuinely lost the plot if they are going to start slating reviewers for posting negatives reviews.

And for what's it's worth, Quesadilla has infinitely more credibility as a punter than you Comaminion.  I really, really mean that.

 

Admin was happy to remove my ban for me to post this review, and if he thought I was full of shit he would ban me again faster than you can say fluffy cunt.  Really not remotely interested in the trolling of anyone else here.

I am not here to debate with people who don't like me or my reviews. You can all just politely go fuck yourselves and will be added straight to my ignore list. It was my inability to avoid getting drawn into those sort of debates that got me banned last time and I won't make that mistake again.

[Quesadilla]

That's one hell of an accusation to make mate!

To be honest its all getting a little bit childish, punter walks due to a picture bait & writes a negative. Nice one
But deems it necessary to link future reviews to the negative with no real connection, why?

Prossie has a walk off, it happens but deems it necessary to tell the whole of UKE who it was (why?) & continues to snipe whenever the opportunity arises.

Fair point Yorkshire, I would agree a little immature of me to link other reviews - as I said she put my back up by her continual indirect sniping on UKE - but I will cease and desist now she seems to have at least updated her profile - to some extent. 

[mattylondon]

Have to disagree terms. The lady I met was NOT the lady in the pictures. It may have been her 10-15 years ago but now bears no resemblance. So she baited me with a younger attractive version of herself and switched with an old ugly woman. 

I can fully respect/appreciate if you feel my definition of bait and switch doesn't tally with yours but we will agree to differ.  When someone is so far from the pictures she uses - regardless who the pics are of - to me it's a b&s and always will be. 

There was nothing good about the snog - she literally grabbed me before I could even think.  I am genuinely a gentleman so did my best not to throw up or run for the door but still needed a minute to get my wits back as I was genuinely in shock. Before I could figure out what to do she snogged me a second time but my lips were sealed.  She then realised I was pulling back and immediately asked for the cash.  A younger, less experienced me would have handed over the cash almost by reflex which is what I am sure she was counting on.

I don't doubt for a second that she was physically as you described. It comes as no surprise to me.

However, this isn't a 'bait and switch' because it is the same individual. I think it's probably more accurate to say she was devious and was deliberately trying to fuck punters over. Deluded too perhaps. A lot of the worn out ones are. This sort of trickery puts the punter in an awkward position. Does he walk or does he feel awkward enough to simply 'go through with it'? I'm sure that many have faced this dilemma.

Of course, she can answer all this by doing as Smiths suggested. Stick up a full body picture with proof of a date. I wouldn't hold your breath on that.

What I found a little curious though, is that you've clearly been involved in a lot of e-mail/forum correspondence with this woman, despite knowing her forum 'reputation' and despite negative reviews and warnings from other punters. So were you after some kind of 'danger fuck' or were you going through the motions in an attempt to curry favour with some members of this forum due to being banned? I think it's a legitimate question. However, as she's been a bit of a cunt in spilling the beans elsewhere, I don't think that applies unless she simply beat you to it!

This is the danger of engaging in correspondence with somebody who you knowingly posts on a forum because if it doesn't go to plan, she always has the capability to fuck you over. It's exactly the reason why I do not knowingly punt with anybody who posts on a forum.

Perhaps you thought you knew better but now I'm sure you realise that you don't!! I suspect that she was pretty pissed off you walked but could well of thought that you led her on. Especially if you snogged her then walked.

I don't think it helped your 'credibility' in this particular case, when you said that you went to a 'regular' afterwards, who you'd only met once before? I think you know that meeting somebody once doesn't really constitute a regular.

To each their own, but I found it incredible that you considered parting with £320 of your hard earned with her?!

[Roth]

I don't doubt for a second that she was physically as you described. It comes as no surprise to me.

However, this isn't a 'bait and switch' because it is the same individual. I think it's probably more accurate to say she was devious and was deliberately trying to fuck punters over. Deluded too perhaps. A lot of the worn out ones are. This sort of trickery puts the punter in an awkward position. Does he walk or does he feel awkward enough to simply 'go through with it'? I'm sure that many have faced this dilemma.

Of course, she can answer all this by doing as Smiths suggested. Stick up a full body picture with proof of a date. I wouldn't hold your breath on that.

What I found a little curious though, is that you've clearly been involved in a lot of e-mail/forum correspondence with this woman, despite knowing her forum 'reputation' and despite negative reviews and warnings from other punters. So were you after some kind of 'danger fuck' or were you going through the motions in an attempt to curry favour with some members of this forum due to being banned? I think it's a legitimate question. However, as she's been a bit of a cunt in spilling the beans elsewhere, I don't think that applies unless she simply beat you to it!

This is the danger of engaging in correspondence with somebody who you knowingly posts on a forum because if it doesn't go to plan, she always has the capability to fuck you over. It's exactly the reason why I do not knowingly punt with anybody who posts on a forum.

Perhaps you thought you knew better but now I'm sure you realise that you don't!! I suspect that she was pretty pissed off you walked but could well of thought that you led her on. Especially if you snogged her then walked.

I don't think it helped your 'credibility' in this particular case, when you said that you went to a 'regular' afterwards, who you'd only met once before? I think you know that meeting somebody once doesn't really constitute a regular.

To each their own, but I found it incredible that you considered parting with £320 of your hard earned with her?!

+1.  Spot on. 

[Belgarion]

My 2 cents. On UKE Chloe is very pleasant to chat with and her posts/comments etc about her services and experiences will tempt anyone. She also made out that she was targeted by a punter and WG on here and essentially was a victim of a smear.

So you can see why someone may want to take a chance and see if that was accurate. I almost did as well but will not until she posts a full body picture.

I do not blame Q at all because I was not that far off making a booking myself. On UKE she is positively delightful to chat with.

However it is pointless having a go at Q. Anyone who thinks he's not being fair or stretching the truth should book her and post a review.

Simples

[Huawei]

Anyone who thinks he's not being fair or stretching the truth should book her and post a review.

Exactly. As I said much earlier in this thread, I found her online persona and chat very appealing in the past. I nearly went for it, only to find indications that all was not as it seemed - and this was a couple of years ago. So I'm out.

Let one of those who thinks this is overblown step up, punt and prove the sceptics wrong 

[Cuntminion]

Exactly. As I said much earlier in this thread, I found her online persona and chat very appealing in the past. I nearly went for it, only to find indications that all was not as it seemed - and this was a couple of years ago. So I'm out.

Let one of those who thinks this is overblown step up, punt and prove the sceptics wrong 

Hold on right there you step up why don't ya


Your opinion is just as viable as mine if you have not been , I don't need to punt to get to my opinion that op has exaggerated

I have seen current photos and that's plenty of evidence for me to get my opinion


Your in exactly the same haven't punted opinion boat

[Belgarion]

Hold on right there you step up why don't ya


Your opinion is just as viable as mine if you have not been , I don't need to punt to get to my opinion that op has exaggerated

I have seen current photos and that's plenty of evidence for me to get my opinion


Your in exactly the same haven't punted opinion boat

You have seen pictures and he has seen her in the flesh. Why does she not post a full body picture like the other ladies on the forum?

She went to great lengths to verify her age, so why the subterfuge now?

[claretandblue]

According to the op he was unbanned just to "write reviews only" ,didn't last long 

[Quesadilla]

According to the op he was unbanned just to "write reviews only" ,didn't last long 

To be clear for those that weren't paying attention. My remit - as I have stated elsewhere - is to write reviews and respond to questions about my reviews. I have absolutely stayed within those bounds and have quite literally no interest in posting anywhere / anything else here. 

If you have a problem I suggest you go running to Admin with it CAB. Bless - are you related to the other Cabbie here by any chance? 

[Roth]

To be clear for those that weren't paying attention. My remit - as I have stated elsewhere - is to write reviews and respond to questions about my reviews. I have absolutely stayed within those bounds and have quite literally no interest in posting anywhere / anything else here. 

If you have a problem I suggest you go running to Admin with it CAB. Bless - are you related to the other Cabbie here by any chance? 

My remit? 

[OldAdmin]

Like the other SummerSexy89 thread, putting this thread to sleep as well unless something new pops up.