London, , United Kingdom
The text explicitly describes fraudulent activity by detailing how "Natalia Hot Goddess" uses photos of other women—without their permission—on her escort/session profiles to misrepresent her true identity and appearance for financial gain, which constitutes deception in commercial transactions.
Last Updated: March 17, 2026
This text contains several elements that describe or suggest potentially fraudulent activity, particularly the use of deception for financial gain and misrepresentation:
1. Impersonation and Use of False Photos (Deception):
Repeated comments explicitly note that the individual in question, "Natalia," uses photos of other women (not herself) on her public profiles (e.g., on "SG" and "WB270"). Users identify at least one of the photos as belonging to another known bodybuilder, An Da Jeong, and confirm this through reverse image search:
- "But the pictures that are online now, both on SG as well as on WB270 are fishy. One of them isn't her, but An Da Jeong."
- "The photos she uses on Sessiongirls are not actually her (use Google Reverse Image search and it'll bring up the FBBs who are actually in her photos)."
2. Admission of Intentional Misrepresentation:
Several posts acknowledge or attempt to justify this misrepresentation:
- "She has a good reason for staying anonymous and also for using some pictures that aren't herself."
- "Because obsessed stalkers ... always find a way to trace a picture. So she felt like using pictures of a very similar physique was the safest option."
- “She just doesn’t use her real name anymore.”
Even if the motive for deception (anonymity, personal safety) is claimed, publishing photos of other women and implying they depict the service provider constitutes false representation.
3. Misleading Prospective Clients to Obtain Money (Potential Fraud):
Multiple posters express concern that this misrepresentation may be intended to lure clients:
- "So this might not be that IFBB Pro at all."
- “It's another to steal someone else's work and claim it as your own.”
Some go further, warning that the real provider may not resemble the pictures and might not be who she claims—a classic hallmark of fraudulent advertising, especially given financial transactions involved (session deposits, service charges).
4. Allegations of “Fake,” “Scam,” or “Fishy” Behavior:
Several users call the situation “fishy,” “dodgy,” a “red flag,” or outright state “A fake, maybe?” or “She is who everyone thinks or claims she is... I put a deposit down with her and she used her real name...I had a feeling the session price rate for her was too good to be true. Turns out she up charges for everything and the up charges are NOT cheap.”
While some users defend the provider, the repeated allegations and warnings from others reinforce that there is perceived deception at play.
5. Pattern of Defensive Rationalizations:
The posts contain discussions rationalizing the use of others’ photos as necessary for privacy, but multiple users correctly note that even with privacy concerns, using someone else’s images without consent for advertising is unethical and can be categorized as fraud:
- “There are ways to handle this, even altering your own photos... Stealing someone else's photos and misrepresenting yourself is a lie and unacceptable in my book.”
Why This Is Fraudulent:
- Using someone else’s images or identity to advertise a commercial service, especially for personal gain and without that person’s permission, constitutes misrepresentation and is a common element of fraud.
- Accepting money based on a false identity or false representations (e.g., promising the appearance or identity shown in misleading pictures) is considered fraudulent inducement.
- Even with claimed justifications (e.g., for privacy), this is not a legal or ethical waiver for misrepresentation in commerce.
Summary:
This text explicitly describes fraudulent activity by noting that a service provider uses photos of someone else (intentional misrepresentation), collects deposits and receives money based on this presentation, and generates financial gain as a result. This constitutes fraudulent advertising: deception for the purpose of obtaining money under false pretenses. Even if some clients report positive experiences, the underlying pattern is one of dishonesty and inducement through misrepresentation, which is a textbook example of fraud in service advertising.