Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mega

Well Here's A Surprise

9 posts in this topic

FR writers S.Mitchell (FR 118591 & 118590) and Honest Jon (FR 118587 & 118526) have both visited the same two two girls (Gemma & Bootylicious) although they are miles apart (Nottingham and London). 

 

Methinks someone is being less than honest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without having checked the dates of their visits, it is entirely possible since the two locations are only about 130 miles apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without having checked the dates of their visits, it is entirely possible since the two locations are only about 130 miles apart.

 

The offending FRs have now been deleted but here are the AW profiles concerned showing it's a scam of some sort. Those with more knowledge of Adultwork will no doubt advise on the nature of the scam!

 

Gemma Minxx (AW Profile 2706386)  based in Nottinghamshire. Member since 29/10/2014 - 6 positive reports by Harry0382, N_Wil, Kev 69, Kenny B, S.Mitchell & Horniest John

 

 Charlotte Prynce (AW Profile 2688410) based in City of Westminster. Member since 15/10/2014 - 5 positive reports by Harry0382, N_Wil, S.Mitchell. Horniest John & Kev 69

 

Raunchy Reeva (AW Profile 2673748) based in Lothian Scotland, Member since 04/10/2014 - 5 positive reports by Harry0382. S.Mitchell, Horniest John, Snedders 69, N_Wil.

 

Krystal99 (AW Profile 2685784) based in Bradford. Member since 13/10/2014 - 5 positive reports by Kev 69, Harry0382, S.Mitchell, Horniest John and N_Wil)

 

Martamurph (AW Profile 2675672) based in Bedford. Member since 06/10/2014 - 3 positive reports by Horniest John, Kev 69 & S.Mitchell

 

Sexy Chanel_B (AW Profile 2671822) based in London. Member since 03/10/2014 - 5 positive reports from Kenny B, martmurph, N=Wil, Lucas Masc, S.Mitchell

 

The only one with a photo is Chanel B and there are no phone numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the research, Mega.

 

Perhaps someone can advise what the scam is. The fact that several female ids (6 to date) have been set up across the country together with a set of male ids (9 to date) to recommend them plus the submission of a number of FRs to Punternet indicates a quite a large scale fraud. There are possibly more that I have missed.  The details of the girls are in some cases sketchy whilst in other cases very detailed. The services offered vary and the charges are around the £150 per hour mark but even in these there is no consistency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All credit to your persistent research, Mega, and what a curious little racket you have uncovered. The FR side of it I can't be certain of, not having seen those, but it suggests that at least Bootylicious (but which one, there are several?) and Gemma of Worksop may be genuine. Who would invent a girl in Worksop, Notts, with the rest of the UK to choose from?

 

This doesn't look like a scam designed to lure money out of the unsuspecting, otherwise we would see a fuller set of hard-sell enticements including stolen photos, promises of sought-after services etc., plus phone numbers, Whereas, as you noticed, many of these profiles are too vague - about rates, incall availability etc., to be able to attract serious interest.

 

Which suggests that the whole very elaborate exercise in multiple fake identities is about creating an apparently credible feedback record, either for Gemma, or for some punter associate of hers (S.Miller?) or both. Some ladies on AW will accept bookings only from punters who have a minimum number of positive feedbacks, so the purpose may be for S.Miller and his aliases to collect those cheaply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All credit to your persistent research, Mega, and what a curious little racket you have uncovered. The FR side of it I can't be certain of, not having seen those, but it suggests that at least Bootylicious (but which one, there are several?) and Gemma of Worksop may be genuine. Who would invent a girl in Worksop, Notts, with the rest of the UK to choose from?

 

This doesn't look like a scam designed to lure money out of the unsuspecting, otherwise we would see a fuller set of hard-sell enticements including stolen photos, promises of sought-after services etc., plus phone numbers, Whereas, as you noticed, many of these profiles are too vague - about rates, incall availability etc., to be able to attract serious interest.

 

Which suggests that the whole very elaborate exercise in multiple fake identities is about creating an apparently credible feedback record, either for Gemma, or for some punter associate of hers (S.Miller?) or both. Some ladies on AW will accept bookings only from punters who have a minimum number of positive feedbacks, so the purpose may be for S.Miller and his aliases to collect those cheaply.

 

It's a complete con - no girls of any of these names will exist. Had the Punternet FRs not been tabled no-one would be any the wiser. The fake AW recommendations keep on rolling in from the intrepid band of men. Add another AW profile, Lovely Lucie AW2677103, Renfrew, Scotland to the list together with a new admirer, Tom the Lush. 

Edited by mega

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may well be right, as none of these "girls" has any feedback except from that crew of fictional "punters". Just as the fictional 9 or 10 punters have never reviewed anyone outside the team of 6 or 7 suspicious "girls" (aside from the Bootylicious FR, which remains a puzzle).

 

The most consistently suspicious side of this elaborate web of fakery is the rate at which the "girls " keep providing rave feedback to their "punters" - on-time, clean, perfect gent, well-hung etc. This leads me to think the accumulation of "punter" feedbacks is the main purpose of the exercise.

 

Did you notice a curious slip-up in the cast of characters? One of these well-travelled "punters" goes by the name of martmurph, which is strangely similar to the "girl" in Bedford called Martamurph - but her published email address has the username "martmurph".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may well be right, as none of these "girls" has any feedback except from that crew of fictional "punters". Just as the fictional 9 or 10 punters have never reviewed anyone outside the team of 6 or 7 suspicious "girls" (aside from the Bootylicious FR, which remains a puzzle).

 

The most consistently suspicious side of this elaborate web of fakery is the rate at which the "girls " keep providing rave feedback to their "punters" - on-time, clean, perfect gent, well-hung etc. This leads me to think the accumulation of "punter" feedbacks is the main purpose of the exercise.

 

Did you notice a curious slip-up in the cast of characters? One of these well-travelled "punters" goes by the name of martmurph, which is strangely similar to the "girl" in Bedford called Martamurph - but her published email address has the username "martmurph".

 

 

I've noticed this and a number of other things - I'll respond in due course. It is unfortunate that the Bootylicious FR was deleted before I realised the true extent of this.  This is nothing to do with the accumulation of male punter feedbacks IMHO - but hey I've been known to be wrong occasionally!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0