PDA

View Full Version : Man jailed for defrauding prostitute


flyhardmo
7th Feb 2015, 02:49
'He made me complicit in my own rape': Man jailed for defrauding prostitute - 9news.com.au (http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/02/07/10/56/he-made-me-complicit-in-my-own-rape-man-jailed-for-defrauding-prostitute)

'He made me complicit in my own rape': Man jailed for defrauding prostitute

A Canberra man who duped a prostitute into having sex with him has been convicted of rape and jailed for eight months.

52-year-old Akis Livas pleaded guilty to the charge yesterday after admitting he gave the woman an envelope stuffed with paper rather than cash because he did not have the money to pay for sex.

The prostitute, whom Livas booked for a four-hour session, believed that the envelope contained $850.

Because she had sex with Livas on the basis that she would be paid, ACT Supreme Court Judge Hillary Penfold ruled that the sex was non-consensual because it was obtained by fraud, noting that the offence was "clearly premeditated".

The prostitute told the court that she has been receiving counselling since the incident and still suffers from a lack of trust in other as a result of Livas' actions.

"I felt internally violated, used and dirty," she said, adding that when she discovered she had been deceived, fear took hold.

"I fully expected he was going to hurt me," she told the court.

"He made me complicit in my own rape."

Livas, who showed disbelief when his lawyer explained that he would be locked up, was also placed on a two-year good behaviour bond.



So a prostitue doesn't make sure she has been paid enough or at all for this matter, then proceeds to have sex for 4 hrs only to cry rape after finding out. She then feels " internally violated, used and dirty" and this bloke goes to jail. Was the judge high? ( marijuana is legal in Canberra last time I checked, several years now)

parabellum
7th Feb 2015, 03:31
Was the judge high? ( marijuana is legal in Canberra last time I checked, several years now)

Probably not 'high' but she was a woman! ;)

mikedreamer787
7th Feb 2015, 03:46
was also placed on a two-year good behaviour bond.So he has to ensure he pays his sluts up front and in toto for the next 2 years?


"I felt internally violated, used and dirty," she saidShe felt....dirty! http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/happy/happy0157.gif


she has been receiving counselling since the incident"I got shagged and he didn't pay!"

"Oh you poor thing! Here...have a joint."

Tolsti
7th Feb 2015, 05:32
How do you make a hormone?



Don't pay her!!

ExSp33db1rd
7th Feb 2015, 06:13
Not sure that jail is the right answer, but he was certainly in breach of Contract.

Metro man
7th Feb 2015, 07:21
$850 for four hours of work where you need no special skills, qualifications or a licence. I think I'm in the wrong job.:E

SpringHeeledJack
7th Feb 2015, 07:57
Not sure that jail is the right answer, but he was certainly in breach of Contract.

Absolutely! What a strange decision to make for a relatively small civil matter of obtaining services by deception, that sex was the trade is irrelevant.

If the supplier was happy to provide the service to the customer throughout the transaction and only became regretful on discovering that the payment wasn't there, surely no emotionally manipulative words such as 'rape', 'dirty', 'violated' could be taken into account ? The customer was an idiot, the supplier naive and there should have been legal redress to make sure money was paid. End of story and yet it turned into a big thing. Social engineering at work :hmm: Even allowing for good wages, how the suppler was able to have intimate contact for 4hrs with any such customer, if by her words of how it would be disgusting, is beyond my little vanilla soaked brain…. :confused:


SHJ

MungoP
7th Feb 2015, 08:45
Reminds me of an excerpt from 'Only Fools and Horses'..
Del Boy explains that some lady or other had just gone down to the police station to complain about being sexually assaulted Sunday night..
Rodney sympathizes and then asks... how come she waited until Thursday to report the assault..?
Del Boy responds..
"Well, she didn't know she'd been assaulted until this morning when the cheque bounced did she ? "

Effluent Man
7th Feb 2015, 09:03
Oh, that Golden Age!

OFSO
7th Feb 2015, 09:29
Oh, that Golden Age!

Yeah, the PC wimps at the BBC wouldn't dare to screen that episode now, would they.

Takan Inchovit
7th Feb 2015, 10:01
Maybe he is still waiting for the invoice.

cockney steve
7th Feb 2015, 10:35
Bit of a stiff sentence, he must have rubbed up the judge the wrong way.
one has to hope he isn't given a hard time now.

In retrospect, he probably feels a drip.
Don't know about Aussie law (seems a bit warped to me) On that basis, any unpaid tradesman (builder, plumber.car-mechanic, electrician etc) should be able to bring CRIMINAL charges, which is the job of the local constabulary and judiciary, for entrapment and slavery.

This is a ridiculous judgement. Retrospectively, she feels violated, dirty, etc.....a sensible judge would have said, " The word you are looking for, is DEFRAUDED, or perhaps CONNED...off to the Civil Court if you want to sue him for recovery of a commercial debt"

She was quite happy before, during and after providing her services to the client.....her feelings altered as a direct result of him not paying, no other reason....crocodile tears, misuse of court, bad decision. (climbs off soapbox)

Checkboard
7th Feb 2015, 10:42
Surely this is an unsafe conviction? Surely consent cannot be retracted retrospectively?

There was a case in Australia in which a couple began sex and, just before the vital moment, the girl changed her mind but the guy finished. Although she admitted that beginning the intercourse was consensual, he was still convicted of rape - something I agree with as the rape occurred after consent was withdrawn (he was not convicted for the first half of the act, but the second half as the second half was without consent).

What if a man proposes marriage, and in the celebration of that the engagement is consummated - but the marriage doesn't take place as they break up six months later? Is that man now guilty of six months of rape?

How long AFTER the event can consent be retrospectively withdrawn for guilt to still apply, under this precedent?

OFSO
7th Feb 2015, 10:45
just before the vital moment the girl changed her mind, but the guy finished.

Unbelievable. So during sexual intercourse consent can be withdrawn at any time and if it is from then on, it's rape. Does this apply equally to both sexes ?

I find this whole situation bizarre. Instead of the usual lustful groans and moans and cries of "I'm coming, are you ?", is one now supposed to keep asking "are you consenting ? are you consenting ?" and if the answer is "no, I'm not" will a response of "whoops, too late" stand up in court ?

cattletruck
7th Feb 2015, 12:39
Canberra is a weird place, do they still have those mega porn shops disguised as hardware stores? I reckon he should have appealed and he most likely would have gotten away with a lesser charge.

Wasn't too long ago when a public servant sued the state after something broke off the wall and hit her on the head during a bonking session in a hotel room paid for by the state. If I recall correctly she won the original court case in the Magistrate but lost the appeal in the Supreme court.

As for consent if your name is Julian then you should get it in writing with a Swedish government stamp.

OFSO
7th Feb 2015, 13:12
Perhaps in order to avoid any of us being charged with rape while attempting consenting sexual intercourse, some form of mechanical device might be employed. I'm thinking that both participants could, for example, have a "hold down" switch in their hands, which upon release ("dead-man's handle") would indicate refutation of consent. This could be tied to a mechanical separation device as used in astronautics, where a powerful spring situated between the two partners enjoying - if that's the correct term - sexual intercourse, is constrained by a pyrotechnic device. Upon either person withdrawing consent, the device would ignite, the spring be released and both persons would separate from one another, the effect of the mechanical separation being enhanced by the pyrotechnic explosion. Subsequent triggering of fire extinguishers to suppress burning of pubic hair might not be a bad idea.

Considering Mr Crun to be the JB expert on electro-mechanical devices I suggest he is given the task of preparing (although possibly not trying out) the first prototype.

belfrybat
7th Feb 2015, 15:07
The sentence is a bit OTT, but he did receive a service through deception. The nature of the service is irrelevant. She was foolish in not checking the envelope beforehand, but the principle still applies.

Simplythebeast
7th Feb 2015, 15:15
Good job she wasn't a virgin or it would have been breaking and entering too.

Mac the Knife
7th Feb 2015, 16:00
"The sentence is a bit OTT, but he did receive a service through deception. The nature of the service is irrelevant. She was foolish in not checking the envelope beforehand, but the principle still applies."

Agree.

"...you need no special skills, qualifications..."

Disagree. At that price she's high class, not some poxy street junkie.

To be a good sex-worker you need to be pleasant, skilled, empathetic, healthy, well kept and a bit of a mini-psychologist.

Not a rubber-doll who lies down on the couch, hoicks up her skirt and says "Go on then, gerronwithit!".

Mac

:cool:

Don_Apron
7th Feb 2015, 18:13
Well a girl's gotta make a living!!

She will have overheads, pimps, working area etc.

Linedog
7th Feb 2015, 19:33
He could've claimed that he left a deposit.

Checkboard
7th Feb 2015, 20:29
Having discussed this - I can now see why it was correct to find the guy guilty of rape.

It's all about Mens rea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea) - the guilty mind.

When the guy entered that room, he knew that the girl wouldn't sleep with him if she knew what he knew. He knew that he was having sex with her without her consent - because he knew that she wouldn't consent.

It's similar to holding a knife at her throat to get her to say "yes", or to find a girl too young to know how to say "no".

In his mind (and he was the one on trial), it was rape.

Mac the Knife
7th Feb 2015, 20:38
"She will have overheads, pimps, working area etc."

Overheads yes, but only trash street whores need pimps or have working areas.

Mac

:cool:

redsnail
7th Feb 2015, 20:41
where you need no special skills, qualifications or a licence. I think I'm in the wrong job

Male prostitutes earn good money. However, you'll have to either have oral sex with the "Johns" or have anal sex, whether the giver or the taker. To earn the very good money, you'll need to be in peak physical shape plus have a reasonable sized penis.

Of course, there are male prostitutes who are "hetero" only - however, you'll have to be able to perform on demand with a woman who would probably never even speak to in any other setting. Plus the pay isn't as good.

So, yep, the job is open if you want it. :ok:

ShyTorque
7th Feb 2015, 21:18
$850 for four hours of work where you need no special skills, qualifications or a licence. I think I'm in the wrong job.:E

Put up some photos of you in a frock and we'll hold an opinion poll. ;)

G-CPTN
7th Feb 2015, 21:28
Australian dollars - BOGOF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_one,_get_one_free).

RatherBeFlying
7th Feb 2015, 22:49
An interesting case. Given the commercial context, I would be more inclined to fraud.

In Toronto, one professional lady took a customer to Small Claims Court and collected. The credit bureau clerks would get a giggle over that one as they entered the details on his credit record:\

It a similar case a twin was convicted of rape after a romp with his brother's GF who was already asleep in bed. When wakened by his amorous approaches in the dark, she took the evil twin for her BF.

redsnail
7th Feb 2015, 23:00
It is an interesting case. He intended to have sex with a person who otherwise would not have had sex with him. His method of coercion was implying he would pay for her professional services. Which he had no intention of doing so.

Would she have had sex with him if he was not intending to pay?
No.
Therefore it is assault. In this case, it is rape.

So, cop it sweet princess, you intended to get sex without her informed consent, now face the punishment.

Metro man
8th Feb 2015, 00:03
A lot of the Australian white prossies, or to use the politically correct term 'sex workers' aren't that attractive but still think they can charge like a wounded bull for their services, hence the popularity of sex tourism.

In Bangkok AU$100 would have got him two hours with a real beauty including a soapy massage, and that's a higher end price.

Unfortunately I lack the six pack abs and am well past the stage where I could be considered a toy boy. As pillow biting doesn't appeal there is very little opportunity for me in this line of work.

With prostitution you are paying for the ability to get up and walk away afterwards with no obligations, ie "Marry me", "Let's live together", "I'm pregnant" or "When are you going to leave your wife ?":E

ExSp33db1rd
8th Feb 2015, 05:57
$850 for four hours of work where you need no special skills, qualifications or a licence. I think I'm in the wrong job.

But do you have the right equipment ?

ehwatezedoing
8th Feb 2015, 06:52
$850 for four hours of work where you need no special skills, qualifications or a licence. I think I'm in the wrong job.:E

Not wrong job, just wrong side if you are a pilot doing this Pay To Fly scheme :p

OFSO
8th Feb 2015, 09:35
$850 for four hours of work where you need no special skills, qualifications or a licence


At that price I would certainly expect special skills and qualifications !

Flying Lawyer
8th Feb 2015, 22:29
ABC News (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-06/man-jailed-for-rape-after-tricking-prostitute-into-sex/6075496)"It seems Mr Livas is still focused on the event as a commercial exercise," Justice Penfold said.


I suspect most people would agree with him.


FL

chuks
9th Feb 2015, 00:11
There was a woman known as the Happy Hooker, a/k/a Xaviera Hollander, who enjoyed her 15 minutes of fame years ago, when she even wrote a book about her life and times, a book that I actually bothered to read. It wasn't a very interesting book for the most part, but I read it anyway. Once.

There was a story in the book about some fellow who hired her for an extensive work-out, but afterwards his rather large check bounced. Then she did feel somewhat soiled, which I found a bit odd. Somehow the money takes away the shame of doing commercial sex; it's an important part of the healing process. So now you know.

Stanwell
9th Feb 2015, 00:57
I remember a cranky old man once saying to me..
"They're all pros - it's only the method of payment that varies!"

Oktas8
9th Feb 2015, 02:42
Traditionally rape was a very serious crime, second only to murder. Because it is a life-changing event, shattering to the woman concerned.

Failing to pay the tradesman doesn't have quite the same moral destruction aspect to it.

So is rape now a relatively minor matter, equivalent in moral terms to defrauding a tradesman?

FlyMD
9th Feb 2015, 03:19
Rule #1: pay your prostitutes in full and up front.

If you don't believe me, ask anybody in the US secret service :}

Um... lifting...
9th Feb 2015, 04:40
chuks-

You may (or may not) be pleased to know that Xaviera Hollander is still in the *ahem* hospitality business. Probably a couple congenial hours on the train and you can be there. Just enough time to thumb through her tome to prepare for some witty repartee.

Home Xaviera Hollander (http://www.xavierahollander.com)

chuks
9th Feb 2015, 06:56
We recently got to chatting in a virtual way, when Xaviera found out somehow that I was an aviator. (I might have let that slip, or else it was her spotting my Ray-Bans, my four-stripe shoulder boards, and my big wristwatch during our Skype session.) Anyway, when I mentioned the Dornier 328, hoping to impress her, she told me that she "can't handle the workload from aviators."

I wonder what she meant by that ....

Anyway, I never get further into anything like this than a few minutes spent Skyping without clearance from Headquarters, which is never forthcoming. No drinking vouchers have ever changed hands, not even some for that nice Miss Prudence Ogopogo of the Central Oil Ministry, Warri, Nigeria, who fell into undying love with me after somehow being given my name by a "close personal friend," some Yoruba prince or other.

Due to recent legislation, even sperm donation as a source of beer money is out; who wants to have 835 people claiming paternal support?

MagnusP
9th Feb 2015, 10:25
Reddo, you're dead right. "Informed consent" is the key phrase here.

SpannerInTheWerks
9th Feb 2015, 12:24
Not sure that jail is the right answer, but he was certainly in breach of Contract.

I think not.

One of the requirements of a valid contract is that it must be legal.

There can never be a 'contract' in these circumstances - where it is illegal to procure the services of a prostitute.

The precedent set here is remarkable.

She's claiming he didn't pay for an illegal service and then claims rape when, irrespective of whether he paid or not, she consented to sex.

The World gets more bizarre by the day!

SpannerInTheWerks
9th Feb 2015, 12:27
"Informed consent" is the key phrase here.

No it's not.

TWT
9th Feb 2015, 12:59
She's claiming he didn't pay for an illegal serviceProstitution is legal in Canberra

Ancient Mariner
9th Feb 2015, 13:05
When I left for sea at the age of 16 my father, who also was a sailor, told me: "If you are prepared to pay for the services of a lady, be prepared to treat her as one." Wise words.
Per

SpannerInTheWerks
9th Feb 2015, 13:09
Prostitution is legal in Canberra

Interesting, thanks!

MagnusP
9th Feb 2015, 14:01
No, it's not.
Errr, yes it is. I suggest you look at the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (for the rest of the UK), or the equivalent statute in the Australian Capital Territory where the offence (to which he pled GUILTY, presumably on legal advice) took place. In the Scottish act, for example, consent has NOT been properly given by B to A if (under Section 13 (2)(d)) B agrees or submits to the conduct because B is mistaken, as a result of deception by A, as to the nature or purpose of the conduct
In this case, she was deceived into believing the purpose was a commercial transaction, therefore she did not give informed consent.

Exascot
9th Feb 2015, 14:35
All I can say is that he must have paid his lawyer in the same manner. A pretty useless defence. Everyone got screwed :p

SpannerInTheWerks
9th Feb 2015, 16:03
Errr, yes it is. I suggest you look at the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (for the rest of the UK)

No it's not.

Just checked the said legislation and, as I thought, not a mention of 'informed consent'.

In contracts, an agreement may be reached only if there has been full disclosure by both parties of everything each party knows which is significant to the agreement, which no doubt what the above Posts are alluding to. :)

Flying Lawyer
9th Feb 2015, 18:19
SpannerInTheWerks
In contracts, an agreement may be reached only if there has been full disclosure by both parties of everything each party knows which is significant to the agreement.

I can't comment on all jurisdictions but there is no such general duty of disclosure in England.
The law does not require contracting parties to lay all their cards on the table. There is a duty not to misrepresent (make false statements) or mislead but that is a different matter.

Contracts, in general, are subject to the doctrine of caveat emptor (let the buyer beware). Consumer protection legislation in recent decades has made significant inroads into that doctrine but it is still the basic principle. Much depends upon, amongst other things, the nature of the contract and whether the seller is a private individual.


* There are 4 basic exceptions to the general caveat emptor principle:
(1) Where there is a statutory duty of disclosure;
(2) Non-disclosure in contracts classed as uberrimae fidei (utmost good faith) such as insurance contracts;
(3) Non-disclosure where there is a fiduciary relationship between the parties. eg a partnership, solicitor/client, trustee/beneficiary, bank/customer;
(4) Where non-disclosure of material fact distorts a positive representation.
Dishonest non-disclosure may, in some circumstances, be deemed to be a misrepresentation.



Oktas8

There's force in the general point you make.

Some might consider that prosecution for Rape in circumstances such as these devalues the seriousness of what is generally, and rightly, regarded as a serious offence.

G-CPTN
10th Feb 2015, 00:35
Although there is probably no doubt that penetrative intercourse occurred in this case, I believe that the recent definition of rape needn't necessarily involve the full Monty.

Whilst not belittling the trauma that victims might undergo (both during and after the incident) is it not in itself devaluing the offence by extending the definition to include what might be a sexual assault?

Of course some would judge a sexual assault as being equally distraughting (?) for some as penetrative intercourse.

The recently publicised cases of 'assaults' on young girls (by Savile et alii) - in which the victims were, by nature of their age unable to consent, despite, perhaps, being willing, detracts from the severity of 'rape' IMO.
I do not contend that what occurred with the young girls (and, in some cases, boys) should be dismissed, but the consideration that rape is an offence involving forceful intercourse against a fighting victim is belittled by including these cases under the description of 'rape' (IMO).

The Judiciary may well see it differently, and a rape is a rape where the victim was not able to give informed consent - like the case being discussed by the OP.

Metro man
10th Feb 2015, 08:53
There was a case where an intruder crawled into bed with a woman, who believing him to be her husband, had sex with him. Even though she had consented, it was on a false assumption and he was guilty of rape.

toffeez
10th Feb 2015, 09:06
Are we now agreed that prostitution is legal in England & Wales?
Running a brothel is not. Flying Lawyer would know.

parabellum
10th Feb 2015, 11:10
Husband and wife wake up, terrible day outside, a howling gale and pouring rain, "Never mind", says husband, "I'll go and see if the fish are biting" and off he trots, about a mile away he realises it is a hopeless idea, drives back, puts the car in garage, undresses and cuddles up next to his wife, "Hello Darling" she says, "Would you believe that stupid husband of mine has gone fishing in this weather?". I'd call that ill informed consent.

SpannerInTheWerks
10th Feb 2015, 12:01
Flying Lawyer

I agree - the wording you quote was taken from an online law dictionary, so I hoped it would create some comment. I wondered if the comment might be valid in other jurisdictions rather than in relation to contracts under English law (but thought not!!!)?

The point of my Posts was that 'informed consent' could be, as you are well aware, a part of a defence in tort - volenti non fit injuria - and not to be confused within discussions on contract or the criminal law, as it has been in many of the previous Posts.

Flying Lawyer
10th Feb 2015, 15:53
toffeez

Correct. Prostitution is not in itself illegal in England & Wales.
However, many activities around it are. eg Causing or inciting prostitution, controlling prostitution for personal gain (pimping), running a brothel (more than one prostitute), soliciting in a street or public place.


G-CPTNThe Judiciary may well see it differently ....
I understand the points you make. Parliament decided to make extensive changes to the law relating to sexual offences - and to introduce some new offences - in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The Judiciary apply the law.


Spanner
the wording … was taken from an online law dictionary, so I hoped it would create some comment.
There was no indication that was your hope.
Just out of curiosity, I'd be interested to read the source for the words you quoted. Please would you post a link?

The point of my Posts was that 'informed consent' could be, as you are well aware, a part of a defence in tort - volenti non fit injuria – and not to be confused within discussions on contract or the criminal law, as it has been in many of the previous Posts.
You are on the wrong track.
You need to read and digest the 'consent' provisions in the Sexual Offences Act 2003, in particular sections 74-76.
(Bear in mind the Pierian spring. ;) )

---


Whilst I understand why an incident such as that which prompted this thread may in law amount to Rape, I also readily understand the views of those who don't think it should.


FL

RatherBeFlying
10th Feb 2015, 17:02
I recall another case reported in Ontario where a man was convicted of Aggravated Assault for poking a needle through the condom before using it in a paid encounter:=

vulcanised
10th Feb 2015, 17:41
Presumably it's only assault if someone's wearing the condom at the time? :)

axefurabz
10th Feb 2015, 19:44
My online convertor tells me that A$850 is about £432. That's not exceptional for 4 hours from a professional. No pun intended btw.

Bronx
10th Feb 2015, 23:06
A$850 is about £432

So the guy got 8 months in jail for a A$850 / £432 / US$ 660 fraud.

That is exceptional and way OTT.

Metro man
10th Feb 2015, 23:25
That's an average income for a WEEK for many people.:hmm:

SpannerInTheWerks
11th Feb 2015, 00:13
Informed Consent legal definition of Informed Consent (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Informed+Consent)

Ovation
11th Feb 2015, 01:36
I feel this is a case of fraud rather than rape.

If he'd put some money (say $10) in the envelope would it still have been rape, or would it then become a commercial dispute?

cockney steve
11th Feb 2015, 11:35
Man and woman make acquaintance in pub, he asks, "would you have sex with me for £10,000? "
She, "Yes, I would"
He," What about £10 ? "

she," Wat do you think I am?, a common prostitute? "

He, " Madam, we have already settled that, now we are negotiating your fee"

panda-k-bear
11th Feb 2015, 14:45
So, cop it sweet princess, you intended to get sex without her informed consent, now face the punishment.

Reddo, there's irony in this. It's likely his punishment will be a certain nervousness in bending over to pick up the soap.


FL - I'd be interested to know, in follow up to your points baout the illegality of acts linked to prostitution - where the line is with regard to Escorts vs Street Prostitutes. The Street workers are presumably in violation of the soliciting and being in a public place part. If an escort is advertised on a website that is not UK based but her services are offered in England, she is booked and attends directly to a home/hotel room or even meets the John in a bar or restaurant to go on and be paid for services rendered later, is any part of what either party does illegal?

I've never 'got' how these more discrete services seem to operate with impunity while the street walkers get arrested.

oldchina
11th Feb 2015, 17:11
"where the line is with regard to Escorts vs Street Prostitutes. The Street workers are presumably in violation of the soliciting and being in a public place part. If an escort is advertised on a website that is not UK based but her services are offered in England, she is booked and attends directly to a home/hotel room or even meets the John in a bar or restaurant to go on and be paid for services rendered later, is any part of what either party does illegal?"

No need to be a lawyer to answer that. If an escort (or simply anyone) advertises their services in England & Wales and is subsequently paid that is not illegal as long as it's a one-person private "business".

panda-k-bear
12th Feb 2015, 11:33
But isn't the act of advertising tantamount to soliciting? I guess that's what I don't understand about where the line is drawn.

dazdaz1
12th Feb 2015, 14:33
A word of advice (very slightly off topic) a friend of mine :suspect: always insists when visiting an establishment to pay by credit card in the UK, the reason being.........

If you buy goods or 'services' on your credit or debit card, you have extra protection if things go wrong compared with paying by cash or cheque.
You can make a claim against your card provider under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act.


The above (so I've been informed) also applies to a lap dance in very upmarket clubs where cash is not exchanged, added to the bar bill.

panda-k-bear
12th Feb 2015, 15:50
Hahahaha! So if you get a substandard lapdance you can ask the credit card company to give you your money back? Fantastic! I'd like to see how your 'friend' would prove that one!

dazdaz1
12th Feb 2015, 16:09
Panda....."Hahahaha! So if you get a substandard lapdance you can ask the credit card company to give you your money back? Fantastic! I'd like to see how your 'friend' would prove that one"

Legally one would state the lap dance did not meet expectations. Firstly taking the matter in situ at the club, if no amicable resolution, take your leave stating "I'll be contacting my credit card company." while doing a runner to avoid the bouncers.

Lonewolf_50
12th Feb 2015, 17:21
dazdaz:Legally one would state the lap dance did not meet expectations. Firstly taking the matter in situ at the club, if no amicable resolution, take your leave stating "I'll be contacting my credit card company." while doing a runner to avoid the bouncers.
The next action would be to research other such venues for your next episode of lap dances, since this one will doubtless deny you entry when arriving for the next visit. ;)

Checkboard
12th Feb 2015, 17:59
Advertising - telephone boxes illegal. Newspapers not.

Prostitution And Exploitation Of Prostitution: Legal Guidance: The Crown Prosecution Service (http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/prostitution_and_exploitation_of_prostitution/#a17)

Metro man
12th Feb 2015, 22:37
Has anyone ever been into a phone box in central London and not found it wall papered with adverts for sex services ?

Checkboard
12th Feb 2015, 23:15
Honestly? Who uses phone boxes these days? :confused:

Metro man
12th Feb 2015, 23:21
They're a useful alternative if you can't find a toilet or you need a place to be sick after 16 pints.:E

G-CPTN
12th Feb 2015, 23:28
Do these 'ladies' who allegedly advertise their services in telephone boxes use the telephone boxes to administer their services?

Pinky the pilot
12th Feb 2015, 23:42
Years ago a workmate of mine in a country town in Queensland once used a phone box which on one wall someone had scrawled
'For a good time ring (name) and a number.

Being a bit of a larrikin he rang the number and explained why he was ringing and asked what was on offer.:ooh:

Some very lewd and explicit details followed to which he laughed and said
"Lady, get ******!'':eek:

As he hung up he heard her laughing!

panda-k-bear
13th Feb 2015, 12:55
Legally one would state the lap dance did not meet expectations.

How would one define what one expects from a lapdance? Ummm, m'lud, it didn't produce any stirrings. As for the phone box thing, the only reason anyone ever uses a phone box must be to grab one of these cards, shirley? Ergo anyone seen in a phone box in London should be regarded with suspicion!

dazdaz1
13th Feb 2015, 14:42
Panda...."How would one define what one expects from a lapdance?"

1) The ladies dancing expertise.
2) Her communication skills directed to the paying person.
3) The quality/style of her stage costume.
4) The reveal of bare flesh as to pre dance expectations/contractual claims/promises.