The text provided contains multiple examples of potentially fraudulent activity, specifically related to the booking of private wrestling or "session" appointments. These sessions typically involve paying a deposit in advance to secure time with the service provider — often a female bodybuilder or dominatrix figure. Here is how the text reveals indicators of fraud, deception, or financial exploitation:
- 💸 Retaining Deposits Without Delivering the Service:
- Several users report situations where a deposit (sometimes as high as £200 or $300) was sent to a supposed session provider, who then canceled or changed the agreed terms of the session — and refused to return the deposit.
- Example:
> “Avoid. After receiving my deposit, she changed the terms of our agreement and won’t return the deposit.”
- Another user confirms:
> “I sent her a deposit years ago and it took a long time and a lot of prodding to get it back after she canceled a trip.”
Keeping a deposit under false pretenses or without agreement to new terms may constitute fraud or theft, especially if the deposit was conditional on specific arrangements.
- ⚠️ Systematic Deletion or Suppression of Negative Feedback:
- A user mentions that their honest review was altered or removed:
> “She asked me to write a review, and I saw she had some negative reviews … that got deleted sometime after.”
Removing or suppressing negative reviews to preserve reputation while continuing dubious practices is a form of deception that misleads future clients, impacting informed decision-making.
🛑 Use of Non-Standard and Unverifiable Booking Methods:
- Several participants in the thread note concerns about paying large deposits via personal emails (e.g., musclefiend.infinity@gmail.com) to unidentified individuals operating "under the radar" (UTR), without verifiable third-party platforms or protections.
- Phrases like “She has not done lift and carry or wrestling before but would be willing to try” suggest inexperience, adding further risk to large financial deposits for uncertain services.
🧾 Changing Agreements Post-Payment:
- In one notable example, a client books a provider, agrees on a location, sends a deposit, and is then told the provider won’t meet at the agreed location and will not return the money. The provider even implies filing a false police report:
> “She then says she’s not going to ‘my studio’ and is going to call the police because I am going to film her without her consent. I cannot make this up.”
This not only demonstrates a changing of terms, but the invocation of potential false accusations in defense of withholding funds — a serious ethical and possibly legal violation.
🚩 Multiple Red Flags Noted by Users:
- Users repeatedly refer to some providers as sending “mixed signals,” being “hard to reach,” “non-responsive for days,” or having “weird rules” on their pages.
- Others explicitly categorize the issue as part of a larger pattern:
> “Unfortunately there are more and more stories like this… it’s more than one bad apple.”
🤐 Suppression of Publicity or Reviews:
- Some providers demand that clients refrain from posting about their experience, under threat:
> “I will NOT tolerate gossip. If I find any tales of a 'private session' on any thread, I will immediately take action.”
While privacy is understandable, threatening clients for objectively recounting their experience reduces transparency — often a sign of something to hide.
🏷 Use of "UTR" (Under The Radar) Operations:
- Several posters note that the provider wishes to remain anonymous, stay "UTR," and only accept communications via non-public email accounts. Combined with requests for large deposits and non-disclosure, this suggests deliberate avoidance of scrutiny or accountability.
🚨 False Advertising:
- One user states:
> “She sent me pics and I identified her. So I wrote her via Instagram. I guess she's not who she claims to be.”
Using someone else’s likeness or misleading photos for financial gain constitutes misrepresentation — a core component of fraud.
In summary, the text reveals fraudulent activity through:
- Retention of deposits without fulfilling agreed-upon terms or issuing refunds.
- Changing conditions after payment.
- Suppression or deletion of negative reviews.
- Requests for large upfront payments to anonymous or unverifiable identities.
- Use of coercive language or threats to silence clients.
- Complaints from multiple users across time, suggesting a pattern.
These behaviors exhibit clear markers of deception and financial misconduct that fall within common definitions of fraud.