The Provider vs. Client "Contract"

[Gia Wren Marlowe 67985]

I don't believe I misinterpreted anything. There was a discussion about legal contracts and going before judges. So I did not draw my argument from nothing. I agree that no one has suggested that anyone be forced to perform sexual acts -- no one on here, anyway -- but if you set up financial consequences for failing to perform them then there is a sense of potential punishment hanging over the head of the provider. I don't see any way around that. Especially with things that are so difficult to quantify, such as the depth of a deep french kiss. Rephrasing things to say, basically, that she isn't losing money, he's just gaining money back, doesn't change the fact that the provider has lost income because a client feels he didn't receive what he thought was agreed upon. So I think my word choices have been correct. There can be a difference between what is intended and what is. To say that no one intends to coerce providers (I'm not trying to throw the word at anyone, but it's the one of the words under discussion) is not the same as saying that the provider doesn't reasonably think that she will be punished for not giving the client what he wants -- even when she finds it is not feasible once they meet (ymmv due to hygiene, etc). I don't believe the word contract, especially as is being discussed by some -- a legal contract -- should apply to a sexual encounter. I do not agree to specific acts in advance, so in my case it's moot, but I do think that even where services are discussed it should be understood and accepted that the services may vary.

 

I used the term "rapey-vibe" because that is exactly how it feels to me. I can't change that that is how it feels to me. I don't like to ever hear of anyone being under contract to perform certain acts, or to make restitution if they don't. I actually don't think people should promise specific things in the first place, though. Because I do think one should deliver on one's promises and I think that where we might not be able to, we shouldn't promise. But the thing is, that's not that easy for a lot of providers, because many clients HATE it when you seem to be coy about what you offer. There do seem to be providers who would be willing to alter the fee structure a bit if something comes up, and, again, I think that is the right thing to do. I am uncomfortable with it being a sort of codified, by contract, thing, though, because I think there is too much room for potential abuse. I think it creates a more frightening and negative environment for providers, without offering much to clients as these things are hard to prove, anyway. My whole point is that it's unworkable. I think it would be nice to be able to call up any provider and get what is promised without worrying about being ripped off. I just can't see a workable solution. If it's a matter of "What is right?" Then a legitimately aggrieved client should get some form of recompense. I'm against trying to enforce what is technically right for the reasons I've stated. Too tough to prove, too much room for misuse.

 

I can't take back the terms I've used because as some men have pointed out, there are two sides to everything. It may suck to hear that this is how it sounds to some of us when people talk about contracts, but if you want real opinions, then it's good to be aware that this IS how it sounds to some people. Some clients feel that things are too much in favour of SPs all the time. We may or may not agree, but saying the opinions sound yucky doesn't do any good. I'm not sure any of us will change anyone's mind on this matter, and I'm not out to offend anyone or make any feel that they are being treated to a condescending lecture. It's a bit draining for me to try to convey something controversial and likely to be unpopular with many on a forum where anything I say may effect my business. But since the involvement of the ladies side of things is one of the advantages of this board, I thought I would add my viewpoint. In any case, I am not looking for a fight over this, and I don't want to repeat my points ad nauseam, so if anyone has further issues with my posts, I may just agree to disagree.

[Parker 19761]

Wow.. this is quite the thread.

 

I hope guys who like to talk about paying last, (and only if it's worth it,) and making legal contracts with escorts, (so that you can be sure she's going to suck your dick without a condom,) carry lots of lube with them... because I don't think this sort of stuff is ever going to make anyone wet... ever.

[almost_anonymous 100]

Wow.. this is quite the thread.

 

I hope guys who like to talk about paying last, (and only if it's worth it,) and making legal contracts with escorts, (so that you can be sure she's going to suck your dick without a condom,) carry lots of lube with them... because I don't think this sort of stuff is ever going to make anyone wet... ever.

 

that's one way to look at it, or you might think of it as a discussion of how business practices in this industry relate to the law. Not sure it's supposed to get anyone excited.

[withpassion 914]

Wow.. this is quite the thread.

 

I hope guys who like to talk about paying last, (and only if it's worth it,) and making legal contracts with escorts, (so that you can be sure she's going to suck your dick without a condom,) carry lots of lube with them... because I don't think this sort of stuff is ever going to make anyone wet... ever.

 

That is well said and very humorous. Thanks for the chuckle.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

The above represents exactly why I don't believe you can "make" a contract in the first place given the inherent fuzziness of these interactions. I didn't make up the "meeting of the minds" element of a contract, it exists in law. If one party thinks they contracted for x and the other party thinks they contracted for y, there is NO contract. I have signed a few contracts in my life and they carefully spell out "exactly" the obligations for each party. Even oral contracts must be specific, or all hell would break loose. Imagine you thought you were buying tires but the seller thought you wanted rims and nothing is spelled out. Do you think that is a legal contract, or simply a misunderstanding?

 

I would like a lawyer to refute what I said. It would be instructive and precedent setting, IMO.

[Guest R**3*9]

I'm very new to this, perhaps I'm a bit naive and my gentile nature doesn't seem to serve me well as a hobbyist. However, talk of contracts and agreements is somewhat disconcerting.

 

Keep in mind this hobby/business is the most intimate "business" interaction two people can have. To think that individual personalities and how they mesh can be ruled out as a factor in an encounter is a bit cold I think.

 

I believe that any honest SP will do what they can to provide the experience the client desires however SP's are people. Fantastic people from what I've seen. It's unrealistic to think that these wonderful ladies can become "love machines" and it's also disrespectful.

 

I have a huge level of respect for SP's and sometimes an SP won't provide you with the service you would like...It's not because she's mean or taking advantage she's human and real and that's why we do this isn't it?

 

If you don't like a service please move on there are many wonderful ladies and I'm sure you'll find one who knocks your socks off...don't be angry or bitter just accept that it didn't work out and move forward.

 

Perhaps I'm naive but that's just me. :)

[withpassion 914]

I'm very new to this, perhaps I'm a bit naive

 

No, not naive at all. You raise valid points, but within a very small range of experiences out there.

 

It's not only about the guy with bad teeth that doesn't get DFK (and I'm pretty sure he won't be bitter as he probably expected that, likely just disappointed as he's ever hopeful).

 

It's also about those SP's that really are only out for money and to get rid of you as fast as they can.

 

It's about those that use YMMV as a ploy to back out of agreed services that were never intended to be provided. It's about those that agree to an hour of their time and once the first shot is fired, it's bye-bye buddy. Or even worse, it's about those that take the money and then suddenly, unexpectedly, there's a knock at the door with the accompanying yelp of, "oh, no, it's my boyfriend! You have to leave out the other door!"

 

So, while you are absolutely not being naive in reference to "any honest SP", the world is not all sugar and spice and everything nice.

 

What would you do with the knock at the door and your money paid? Is expecting something to be returned being bitter? Is losing a good chunk of your disposable income not something to get angry about? Yup, just move on.

 

What I'm saying is that there are varying degrees of interaction and expectations. The "contract" as stipulated is not always honoured.

 

There have been a lot of thoughtful and reasoned responses on both sides of the equation.

 

I'm sure the SP side has enough stories about sugar and spice not being nice to make us cringe.

 

I am not an SP, so I only have experience from the side of the hobbyist.

 

Btw...I have always only had nice things said about me by the well known SP's, so don't think I'm just hamming it up cuz I'm angry and bitter.

[canuckhooker 19202]

My last words on this subject because quite frankly it has become tiresome with people resorting to emotion and using words that are deliberately inflammatory.

 

Not all clients are perfect. Some are complete arseholes. They can be dangerous, they can be liars, they can be thieves.

 

Not all providers are perfect, they can be dangerous, they can be liars, they can be thieves.

 

Not all encounters could be considered contractual because of the nebulous way the encounter was set up. e.g. no specific requests, no promises, just let it flow. But not all encounters are that way, and sometimes clients have specific requests or providers make certain promises of service.

 

The question here was whether or not a contract exists and what rights does someone have if one or other party violates that contract. And that went for both providers and clients. Although the original question was from a clients point of view we have examined and discussed the topic in a civil manner.

 

One of the very valid points made in this argument was that if a client contracted for full service, completed the act and took the envelope back, was that it would be sexual assault. And I have no problem with that. That is axiomatic in my mind.

 

But on the other hand to suggest that someone seeking restitution from a provider for breaching an agreement, is "rapey" well that is offensive.

 

Sexual assault is something serious, and to refer to it in this context actually belittles those who have been victims, and points the finger at people who may have been victims of a someone whose sole intention was essentially fraudulent. It is being used like a trump card to justify a point of view.

 

Once we result to these kinds of logical fallacies to win an argument I am the hell out of here.

[Gia Wren Marlowe 67985]

I am not resorting to emotional appeals nor inflammatory statements to win an argument. How very, very dismissive and condescending of you to say so. If you are not able to understand my points, that is fine. But do NOT assign me motivations. I explained things exactly as I see them, and obviously I am not the only one who sees things that way. I tried to keep the points at which we disagree civil, but you obviously have no interest in that. I have put myself out there where I would be better off staying silent to protect my business interests, because I thought it was worthwhile to have all points of view on the table. If your only response to my posts is to say that I am just wrong, and that I am making light of consent, then I will not bother trying to have a reasoned debate with you in future. There are more positive ways I can spend my time.

[Cleo Catra 178382]

Sexual assault is something serious, and to refer to it in this context actually belittles those who have been victims, and points the finger at people who may have been victims of a someone whose sole intention was essentially fraudulent. It is being used like a trump card to justify a point of view.

 

Once we result to these kinds of logical fallacies to win an argument I am the hell out of here.

 

I have been the victim of sexual assault. That is NOT something I am going to talk about here, but if you are saying victims of sexual assault will feel belittled by Georgiana's post, I point it out to say that I am a victim of sexual assault, and I do not in any way feel belittled by what she had to say. I don't believe that was her intention at all, and I didn't infer any of that from what she had to say. I'm sorry if you feel that way, and I appreciate it if you feel you're trying to stand up for something, or someone, but I truly believe you're placing ill-intentions behind a post that was not made with any ill-intentions whatsoever.

 

We all need to keep in mind that sometimes people use the wrong word, or a sentence can be typed a bit too fast, or whatever the reason may be that an online post isn't read the way it was typed.

 

But I honestly agree with her - I do not think that anyone should feel 'contractually obligated' to perform. If, for every encounter, I had to sit there and think 'Did I kiss him deep enough, was the blowjob long enough' etc etc, and worrying about if I'd fulfilled my end of the contract.... well honestly, I wouldn't keep doing this because it wouldn't be fun. I tell my clients that I don't do anything I don't wanna do - and that's true. If something doesn't feel good, I won't do it. And if someone was to say 'Nope, you need to let me continue going down on you, even though your clit is sensitive from that orgasm, because you told me there would be no limit on how long I could DATY, it's in our contract'. Jeebus. Where is the fun in that? THat WOULD feel like coercion. That isn't a word anyone wants involved in an encounter , but I also don't think that the use of that word means Gia was playing any kind of 'trump card'.

[Guest fi****ek]

That is always an unfortunate situation. Most SP's are upfront and you can believe that YMMV comes into play.

 

Others use it a hook/excuse...as in yes, I do ....

 

But, then they make up some excuse to not provide a service they said they did, but never intended to provide.

 

The best approach is to verify once you arrive and NEVER pay up front. That is the only real incentive that you can provide. If the SP knows you are not paying upfront, she will 1) ensure she is honest, 2) provide what she says she will.

 

We all know if we haven't washed in a week that an SP will be reluctant to do what she said she would. So, we have to be honest with ourselves too.

 

I never pay up front and if there is ever an issue, I still pay what's expected and, as other's have suggested, I just don't return. But believe me guys, you'd be amazed at how not paying up front changes the dynamic most of the time. It's too bad that so many have been fooled into thinking that paying in advance is the "norm" as it is not nor is it to your advantage.

 

I feel sorry for you, to view women who you wish to be intimate with in such a contemptible light, that they're basically dishonest and out to cheat you, and that you have to hold non-payment over their head to make yourself feel secure about an encounter. Sad, really. I know one thing, I never want to be like you.

[becker 389]

Very interesting replies and perspectives. Perhaps "Contract" was too strong a word, and I should have used "Agreement" or "Understanding". For the record, I always gladly pay upon arrival and thank the provider for seeing me upon arrival. I always have a shower to assure the provider I will be fresh and clean. I always say thank you at the end, and sometimes text "thanks again......" later. I feel/hope I am a pretty good client. Also, in my experience, the chances of getting "baited and switched" so to speak are much, much greater outside of CERB. When this has happened, I never expressed my disappointment verbally or later by text....bygones were bygones....but it did incline me to start this thread.

 

Regardless, and I am not hoping to drag this thread on for 2 more weeks, perhaps I can clarify my question as such, and it's a basically a YES or NO question, and it's an industry question, not an Ottawa CERB question.

 

If a provider outright "baits and switches/deceives/misleads") a hobbyist who based on these mistruths books an appointment and pays in full upfront, in your opinion, should the hobbyist have any recourse other than never seeing her again....YES or NO?

[OSaab 574]

If a provider outright "baits and switches/deceives/misleads") a hobbyist who based on these mistruths books an appointment and pays in full upfront, in your opinion, should the hobbyist have any recourse other than never seeing her again....YES or NO?

 

In those cases where the SP enters the engagement with intent to deceive/swindles a hobbyist? Yes, it would be nice to have some recourse. However I am not sure what sort of recourse you would expect to have, beyond walking away and posting some warning here in the B&S thread and on other review sites.

 

Ask for a refund? You have likely just insulted the honest SP and made them feel uncomfortable. As for the swindler? How likely do you think it is that someone who set out to rip you off is going to say 'oh sure, no problem. Here you go'?

 

Any sort of recourse system would absolutely have to treat all of the honest and hardworking SP's with respect. It is certainly not fair for them to suffer because of a few dishonest crooks. I can not think of anything off hand does that while still providing the type of recourse you seek. Would you want to work at a job where your clients or boss always treated you like you were going to rip them off? I know that I would find it hard to do my job with a smile and any sort of passion.

 

I know that I would rather accept the risk of losing some cash than make an honest SP feel uncomfortable enough to question whether they should be in the business. If enough people did that all we would be left with are the scammers and SP's that no one would want to recommend. How much fun would the hobby be then?

[MightyPen 67414]

If a provider outright "baits and switches/deceives/misleads") a hobbyist who based on these mistruths books an appointment and pays in full upfront, in your opinion, should the hobbyist have any recourse other than never seeing her again....YES or NO?

It hinges, crucially, on the exact nature of these things that happened or didn't happen, and how reasonable it is to expect sexual services to be dispensed for cash like pushing buttons on a vending machine.

 

Nobody here is defending the right of anyone to commit outright fraud -- arranging for a "boyfriend" to storm into the room and chase a client away, or to smack someone over the head with a lead pipe and steal his wallet. If that kind of stuff happens, then YES the client should have recourse. And you CAN go to the police and pursue the usual legal remedies.

 

Instead, we're talking about something else: what specific acts took place during a session, and how/how often/how well as perceived by the client, and the discretion the SP has in the delivery of something agreed upon in advance. We're talking about the nature of ANY agreement for sexual services, and the ethics of considering such agreements to be binding (upon threat of withholding or reclaiming the fee). This is why I balk at the term "contract" to do X, Y, and Z, and instead would go only as far as "general, nonbinding agreement" to go there only provided she remains willing when the time comes. Regardless of the discussion up front, the fee, in full, buys only the SP's preparation, her time for the session, the setting she provides (for an incall), the personal engagement during that time, and the strong probability of some intimate play -- but never its guarantee. If you thought the money was buying you a list of acts, and everything else just came free, then you've misunderstood the transaction from the very beginning.

 

It's the attempt to push the opposite idea: "no, I've paid, now you MUST do X! DO IT! Or give me my money back!" that I find unsettling and has that disturbing vibe mentioned earlier. 'Cause it's about exerting power over someone else regarding intimate acts -- and you just don't get to do that, not even as a sex work client. Nobody's money buys them that right.

[Guest N***he**Ont**y]

This thread seems to be going off topic again. Implied contract between the two parties? It is a matter of consent between two parties for the time of the of the Companion for an agreed time that is it. There is no implied contract of what will happen after the door closes between the two parties as you are paying for her time and what happens after that is solely up to the Companion and not the client! Behave and follow instructions you may have a great time if not well your hands maybe your only option that day. So gentlemen pay up at the start of the date and I am sure you will be a happy person afterwards.

Nuff Said!

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Becker, to answer your latest question about bait and switch, like judge Judy says, if you eat the meal you can't withhold payment afterward just because the meal wasn't what you expected. The time to withold payment is before you consume the service. Leave if she misrepresented herself and take your envelope with you.

As for contracts, I've been clear that they have no place in this business.

[spencer2 278]

If you come with a shopping list, you are in the wrong place...!This not what the lifestyle is about. You want to be satisfied, just act natural, enjoy the company and do not make demands. Just enjoy and "play" with what is on hand and I am sure you will leave happy and satisfied It is not a question of filling your shopping list...If it is your concern, you are the problem.

[jkirkham1 447]

I wanted to comment on this thread and ad my viewpoint in case it can help others starting out. There are two terms being used in the thread that amuse me, contracts and hiring. In my opinion there are no contracts made here, we make agreements. We are not hiring, we pay for an experience offered by an SP.

 

The term hiring for an SP is misleading, I hire people to mow my lawn and I pay them when they're done. When I pay an SP I am after entertainment. Much like going to a show I will read reviews first, or maybe an advertisement was extremely effective. A difference is the cost but, put bluntly, this is not a hobby to get into if you are focusing on your 'hard earned money' and getting the most bang for your buck. When I hire people I am the boss, when I pay a provider it is their show, I am not hiring them to do work but paying for their (interactive) performance.

 

I am not a fan of the phrase 'donation is for time only' and notice it seems to be used mostly by hobbyists feeling the need to speak up for SP's. The donation is not for time but for an erotic encounter. However there is no contract, not every meeting, agreement or purchase involves a contract. There is no meeting of the minds as Steve McQueen has said, more importantly there are no terms and conditions listed (the fine print). There is no contract without this, just an agreement, and we do not get into these kinds of details in this business. Though an interesting topic would be how that may change depending on an upcoming SC ruling.

 

The original question isn't new thinking, every client has had concerns when contacting a new provider. I found Cerb and another site that was too fond of symbols and coloured text at the same time starting out and wondered why anyone would use the other. After finding the diary I can't understand how anyone gets fooled by obvious scams when there is a professional, client oriented site available. CERB seems to have come about because of clients wanting to pool information to protect themselves from being victimized.

 

Thankfully CERB has no negative reviews, which I feel is a big reason for the positive community feeling here. That doesn't mean the client is SoL though. Positive reviews are a powerful thing! They are the best form of advertisements for SP's. Reading the comments from providers on this thread alone you can see why repeat clients are desired given as new clients seem to cause the most issues. Starting out I looked first at reviews, ignoring advertisements, and looked into providers with the most positive comments. I noticed some listed things they do by category which felt mechanical to me but I understood the marketing, while others focused more on the overall experience and put effort into conveying their warmth and nature which appealed more to me and led to many memorable moments.

[withpassion 914]

Well said my friend! It is always buyer beware, but this site isn't the only approach to take. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, but there are pitfalls.

 

It all depends on where one's interests lie.

 

Is it safety? Is it not having any expectations? Or is it putting up the cash for a perceived end result? Nothwithstanding YMMV, I would think that walking in with nothing in mind is a bit naive. Surely, there is some thought as to what you'd want, otherwise, why bother. And perhaps not. To each their own. Personally, I have expectations. I convey that and there is agreement. Once sealed, I expect the 'contract' to be fulfilled. And before I jumped all over, once again, I am a nice guy. I don't hold a gun to the SP's children's heads, nor do I make the SP dance while holding the cash over their heads. It's really simple. Don't agree to something you have no intention of providing. Is it a contract? I would think so. I have texts or emails proving that the SP agreed. If things change, then the contract is broken. Of course, that is my opinion.

 

 

 

 

I wanted to comment on this thread and ad my viewpoint in case it can help others starting out. There are two terms being used in the thread that amuse me, contracts and hiring. In my opinion there are no contracts made here, we make agreements. We are not hiring, we pay for an experience offered by an SP.

 

The term hiring for an SP is misleading, I hire people to mow my lawn and I pay them when they're done. When I pay an SP I am after entertainment. Much like going to a show I will read reviews first, or maybe an advertisement was extremely effective. A difference is the cost but, put bluntly, this is not a hobby to get into if you are focusing on your 'hard earned money' and getting the most bang for your buck. When I hire people I am the boss, when I pay a provider it is their show, I am not hiring them to do work but paying for their (interactive) performance.

 

I am not a fan of the phrase 'donation is for time only' and notice it seems to be used mostly by hobbyists feeling the need to speak up for SP's. The donation is not for time but for an erotic encounter. However there is no contract, not every meeting, agreement or purchase involves a contract. There is no meeting of the minds as Steve McQueen has said, more importantly there are no terms and conditions listed (the fine print). There is no contract without this, just an agreement, and we do not get into these kinds of details in this business. Though an interesting topic would be how that may change depending on an upcoming SC ruling.

 

The original question isn't new thinking, every client has had concerns when contacting a new provider. I found Cerb and another site that was too fond of symbols and coloured text at the same time starting out and wondered why anyone would use the other. After finding the diary I can't understand how anyone gets fooled by obvious scams when there is a professional, client oriented site available. CERB seems to have come about because of clients wanting to pool information to protect themselves from being victimized.

 

Thankfully CERB has no negative reviews, which I feel is a big reason for the positive community feeling here. That doesn't mean the client is SoL though. Positive reviews are a powerful thing! They are the best form of advertisements for SP's. Reading the comments from providers on this thread alone you can see why repeat clients are desired given as new clients seem to cause the most issues. Starting out I looked first at reviews, ignoring advertisements, and looked into providers with the most positive comments. I noticed some listed things they do by category which felt mechanical to me but I understood the marketing, while others focused more on the overall experience and put effort into conveying their warmth and nature which appealed more to me and led to many memorable moments.

[andflemcol 3975]

Legalities aside, I don't think there can be any contract for yyy services for $xxx when ymmv exists. I have never seen a contract that says you may or may not receive the services for a set price. It does not work that way.

 

When the services are agreed upon and then not delivered for whatever reason, it is a breach of contract for not satisfying the terms of the contract. There is a problem when there are unwritten rules such as "ymmv" or the client should be clean and fresh etc. it is obvious for most hobbyists and SP's that these rules or expectations exist. But if they are not discussed, there are going to be situations where expectations were not realized.

 

I think in any sort of contract (oral, email...) between a client and an SP, there has to be disclaimer that spells out ymmv and expectations. I would think the safest for the SP's is to refer clients to a website which contains the expectations. In effect, if the client agrees to the terms contained in the website then they are agreeing to terms of a contract so to speak.

[roamingguy 300291]

It really gets kinda sad when it actually has to be spelled out YMMV. Is common sense and common decency so far gone that a prospective client needs to have things such as a fresh shower, shave, fresh breath, deodorant, clean clothes etc spelled out contract form like before having a date with a professional companion. I really wonder after reading some posts how did these guys manage to date in the civilian world.

Instead of worrying about a provider vs client contract which to me sets the tone of the encounter off wrong. It implies, using the phrase "provider versus client" a underlying conflict between the two. And using a contract is using legalese to navigate any unforeseen circumstances that may happen in an intimate encounter

Why not, instead go into an encounter with a positive attitude. The lady is a professional companion, so go to the date using some simple common sense, like good hygiene and paying her in full on arrival. Treat the lady, every lady, like a lady, with respect and appreciation, and she'll treat you like a gentlemen and return the respect and appreciation. And don't worry about contracts and other distasteful things. Instead let things unfold naturally, and do what you can to make the encounter an enjoyable time not just for you but for the lady too. And you'll find the encounter will likely be a very memorable memory

A late night, I guess early morning rambling

RG

[Guest Miss Jane TG]

As a provider I am actually inclined to believe that the provider/client relationship is premised on a contract. Some might disagree with the semantics but the nature of the relationship is providing sexual services in exchange for money.

 

The substance of the contract is variable among different providers. Each provider usually sets her own menu OR no menu at all, but with all respect when a client asks specifically about a certain service and the provider comes up with an excuse at the time of the session, this is an upfront scam in my opinion.

 

Let's take this example, client X asks provider Y if she would do BBBJ and she explicitly agrees. Upon arrival and after receiving the donation and undressing, provider Y noticed that client X's genital area is not that clean to the provider's satisfaction so she declined BBBJ. What ever argument provider Y comes up with is, in my opinion, not convincing! If you have any preconditions to provide BBBJ then explicitly state them before you bring the client in!

 

This is the good news for those who believe the existence of a contract between providers and clients. But let's get to the bad news!

 

Is it possible to enforce such a contract?

Well, if any of the hobbyists can share his secret adventures with his wife/partners/gf/family/community/etc. then he should avail himself and ask for a redress!

 

It is for this reason that review/recommendation boards are in existence.

[xxxAxxx 21016]

my personal PoV:

 

There is an "agreement" of sorts made between client/SP ; time for money.

 

What happens during that time is not part of any "agreement".

If a client asks if specific services are offered, that does not suddenly turn said agreement into a contract forcing the SP to provide this service. As previously stated, this is "rapey" because the client can only want 2 possible outcomes: money back or forcing the SP to provide mentioned service. Both of which seem ridiculous to me. Not to mention that if I contact LE and tell them you forced me into any type of sexual act, they wouldn't ask me if said act was implied beforehand or not, they would only be concerned with the fact that I said no DURING the encounter.

 

Example:

Client: Do you allow digits?

SP: YES.

During the encounter, things did not naturally flow to the direction of digit-usage. Have I breached our agreement?

NO.

He still got the TIME he paid for. He will not force me to allow digits after his time is finished, nor would I be willing to give him back a single dime.

 

And then we come to the disgruntled client who threatens to write a bad rieview on another site. I would not give in to this form of blackmail, my dignity is worth much more to me than my online reputation.

 

Hobbyists need to understand that it IS time they pay for, the only scenarios when they should feel ripped off is when the encounter is cut short by an SP (or of course any B&S stuff, obvious scams etc.). Anything that does or doesn't happen in that time is of little importance when it comes to "terms of an agreement". And what do you do when time is cut short? Don't see her again. End of story. The amount of money you would spend on legal representation in court should exceed that which you spent on the encounter itself so even discussing seeking legal action in this situation is ludicrous.

 

I personally do offer specific acts an extra cost, ie: Greek or CIM.

If a customer pays up front for greek, and during the encounter we find out it isn't going to work today, I do give him back the tip that was provided for the greek option. But am I going to give him a discount on the hourly rate because we didn't try the doggie position? pardon my French, but, HELL NO! The hourly rate is what it is, TIME.

My rate is not $200 for X,Y & Z services, it's $200 FOR AN HOUR, and this hour holds the possibility of X, Y & Z. (In my personal case, you just have an option to "upgrade" services allowed, and these are refundable since this cost is for an act, I don't think client should pay if THESE SPECIFIC ACTS that were attempting to be "purchased" were not provided)

 

And as for the gentleman who decides not to pay at the end (I personally do not get into this situation myself), I would gladly introduce you to my putter, ask Tiger Woods how that feels and then re-think your point of view.

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"

[Guest B**na***oy]

And as for the gentleman who decides not to pay at the end (I personally do not get into this situation myself), I would gladly introduce you to my putter, ask Tiger Woods how that feels and then re-think your point of view.

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"

 

My kind of woman. ;-) But I sure wouldn't want to fall on your bad side.

 

I think AleXxXis describes the issue very well, Time for Money and I might add between two consenting adults. When one of the adults in no longer consenting, it's end of story, move on.

[kmwq 5477]

Fortunately, it's not happened to me yet. I rarely leave the envelope upfront and have only been asked once for it before starting. I did as asked with a smile and that was that. If it happens, be a gentlemen and just leave but don't see her again. I'd say it's live and learn.