The Provider vs. Client "Contract"

[canuckhooker 19203]

I like the term 'review fraud". It speaks to a number of concerns many sps have about reviews and review sites.

 

I think Fun Valerie is particularly aware of the damage review fraud and misleading posts can do, and I appreciate the fact that she is now spending time here to post and comment on these issues.

 

 

i also think she was being facetious, knowing as I did when I made my post, that withpassion would have a really difficult time rising to the challenge of showing us ads and sites that specifically say 'pay me later, I don't know you, and I know that post payers often rip off sps, but what the heck, I'm feeling lucky." in their FAQ section.

 

The funny thing about "review fraud" is that the knife cuts both ways. Even worse on a site like this where you can only say positive things. That means that we are more at the mercy of inflated reviews, shills etc. And there have been numerous instances of that.

 

If you want to use that term then fill your boots, but remember it can cause as much of a problem for a client as it does for a provider. Unless of course you operate under the premise that negative things are only perpetrated by clients.

[Phaedrus 209521]

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.

 

So you walk into an encounter assuming you're about to be ripped off? I have to ask: if this is the case, why did you book with her in the first place?

 

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.

 

If you're going to pay anyway, why bother going to the effort of making the SP you're with worry that you're going to rip her off? What's the point? How does it make the encounter better for either of you?

 

But believe me guys, you'd be amazed at how not paying up front changes the dynamic most of the time.

 

I have no doubt that this is true, although I suspect I'd make the same statement with a rather different emphasis.

[fortunateone 156618]

The funny thing about "review fraud" is that the knife cuts both ways. Even worse on a site like this where you can only say positive things. That means that we are more at the mercy of inflated reviews, shills etc. And there have been numerous instances of that.

 

If you want to use that term then fill your boots, but remember it can cause as much of a problem for a client as it does for a provider. Unless of course you operate under the premise that negative things are only perpetrated by clients.

 

 

I'm operating under the premise that the only ones posting fake bad reviews are disgruntled clients who didn't get what they wanted from the sp, even if what they wanted was to pay after the session. :)

 

:p And I'm also operating under the premise that just because a site has a recommendation only policy, it does not at all make reasonable people think that all the recos are fake shill inflated glowing reports. Even on sites that allow the trash and bash fests, there are still lots of good reviews because there are still lots of great sps.

 

I've always been puzzled by someone's negative willingness to believe the bad reports, but not the good ones, even to the point of excluding all the good ones just because one person posts a negative comment somewhere.

 

Are all bad reviews fake? Probably not. But neither are all good reviews fake. Hence the term 'review fraud', and I don't know many sps who haven't been victims of review fraud of some kind or another. A fake review posing as a good one, indicates services provided the sp doesn't offer, increases her calls requesting those services. Causes trouble for her. Why does she want a good review pulled? Because it was giving misinformation. How many sps have requested edits or removal of these kinds of reviews? How about most if not all of them.

 

Additional Comments:

So you walk into an encounter assuming you're about to be ripped off? I have to ask: if this is the case, why did you book with her in the first place?

 

 

 

If you're going to pay anyway, why bother going to the effort of making the SP you're with worry that you're going to rip her off? What's the point? How does it make the encounter better for either of you?

 

 

 

I have no doubt that this is true, although I suspect I'd make the same statement with a rather different emphasis.

 

 

 

It occurred to me that in fact an sp who wasn't paid in advance is very likely to withold some services, or make sure the time ends at the half hour if not sooner. After all, she has no guarantee he brought enough money for the encounter he claims he wanted. He says he wants the full package for an hour, she thinks what if she provides that and he hands her enough for a half hour massage, and says, oops, my bad?

 

This method is far more likely to lead to a short change in services, no wonder he thinks it works for him, I can't imagine too many sps providing the full deal without seeing he's got it with him.

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

The arguments I have read so far (just skimmed the thread) about not paying ahead of time are ludicrous. Why on earth would I ever trust someone I had never met before to follow thru at the end our our encounter. I would be on edge, anxious and not a heck of a lot of fun; but hey, if that gets you off, guess it's another story!

[SexxxyRebecca 57989]

I couldnt agree more with Phaedrus!

 

If you book a reputable Sp.. Why on earth you would have problem that she doesnt deliver what you want? Of course there is always the YMMV thing.. before meeting somebody we can never guarantee somehing at 100%. If you are not sure about the service you will receive or the chemistry.. Book a shorter appointment.. If it click.. Amazing! If not, move on! Dont book her again.

 

So if you go through the appointment and it wasnt like you expected.. You dont pay her?! You try to kiss her and.. Ohh I dont like the way you kiss so I will just leave?

 

Doesnt make any sense.

 

So you walk into an encounter assuming you're about to be ripped off? I have to ask: if this is the case, why did you book with her in the first place?

 

 

 

If you're going to pay anyway, why bother going to the effort of making the SP you're with worry that you're going to rip her off? What's the point? How does it make the encounter better for either of you?

 

 

 

I have no doubt that this is true, although I suspect I'd make the same statement with a rather different emphasis.

[Gabriella Laurence 301887]

I trust somebody once to pay after.. Still waiting after my money few months later! Never again. Period.

 

That happened to me too a few years ago and since then, I appreciate the envelop at the beginning of the encounter. There is no way I ever want to hear again, while on his way out, "how much do I owe you?" ... tell him the cost for 2 hours-after confirming via email prior--can you say awkward?-- and dealing with the fact that the "gentleman" didn't even have close to what he owed me on him OR have a new client say "sorry, I left the envelop at home or at the office, can I come back to pay tomorrow?" and you guessed it, he becomes the best disappearing act you have ever seen!

 

Under the circumstances, being trusting with a new client or with someone you haven't established a comfortable level of trust with is, unfortunately, not to a lady's advantage and by not receiving payment upfront, it is automatically putting the lady companion in a most vulnerable and precarious situation.

 

On top of this, if you know the lady requires her donation upfront and you decide to show up and refuse to pay upon arrival and when she reminds you of the "let's get he business aspect out of the way first so we can forget about it" and you decide to leave because of it, you have just become a major waste of time on a power trip! Things like this are not up for negotiation. It is what it is because ladies do not want to get taken advantage of. Period. Nothing more, nothing less.

[craig101 3213]

I don't think this is much of a problem here on Cerb. The ladies here are professionals and have their reputations and their livelihood to protect. They have a vested interested in this.

But if we are to be fair, we know there are a lot of ladies out there with the intent of deceiving. Just have to read the diary to know this is true.

Of course the sp is looking out for her best interests and the client is looking out for his best interests. Don't think anyone is being evil here.

I think the best thing guys can do is do their research and make informed choices.

[waterat 20911]

....into forgetfulness.

 

There have been many thoughtful and considered responses to this thread.... I think maybe it has gotten more mileage than it deserves....

 

J

[Guest realnicehat]

....into forgetfulness.

 

There have been many thoughtful and considered responses to this thread.... I think maybe it has gotten more mileage than it deserves....

 

J

 

Based on the number of thanked posts on what is only page 6 of this thread it appears as though many people are still interested.

 

If we can have multiple 200 page picture threads I see no reason to shut down what is still a (mostly) civilized discussion on the different viewpoints providers and clients may have about the industry. It might have gone offside here or there but there still seem to be valid points being made.

 

Like all threads it will drift into obscurity on it's own. Why force it?

[canuckhooker 19203]

Based on the number of thanked posts on what is only page 6 of this thread it appears as though many people are still interested.

 

If we can have multiple 200 page picture threads I see no reason to shut down what is still a (mostly) civilized discussion on the different viewpoints providers and clients may have about the industry. It might have gone offside here or there but there still seem to be valid points being made.

 

Like all threads it will drift into obscurity on it's own. Why force it?

 

Because this thread got derailed by people focusing on one person's point of view, and they started debating that instead of sticking with the OP's original premise and question. For some it became an obvious exercise in bashing. It certainly didn't address the OP's question.

 

We went from the very tricky concept of a "contract" between and SP and a client, and all that that entails, to the highly negative concept of "review fraud" and a very one-sided argument. In the spirit of the board I will leave it at that in this forum. I will gladly discuss elsewhere. (and that does not mean the infamous red board a place I tend to avoid)

[WriteOn 3250]

In the spirit of the board I will leave it at that in this forum. I will gladly discuss elsewhere. (and that does not mean the infamous red board a place I tend to avoid)

 

Then where would you like to discuss it?

[Guest realnicehat]

Because this thread got derailed by people focusing on one person's point of view, and they started debating that instead of sticking with the OP's original premise and question. For some it became an obvious exercise in bashing. It certainly didn't address the OP's question.

 

We went from the very tricky concept of a "contract" between and SP and a client, and all that that entails, to the highly negative concept of "review fraud" and a very one-sided argument. In the spirit of the board I will leave it at that in this forum. I will gladly discuss elsewhere. (and that does not mean the infamous red board a place I tend to avoid)

 

Yes, the thread got derailed. It happens. We've gone from contracts to appropriate payment procedure to review fraud. Conversations evolve. It's pretty common when I'm sitting around the fire with friends that our chats get way off topic and even heated. Sometimes it comes back around to the original subject, sometimes it doesn't. I mean really, look how far off topic I am right now but does a discussion board conversation really need to be that rigid?

 

You've mentioned the derailment twice now and wished that we would get back on topic. Why not offer your thoughts on contracts and see if you can get us there?

[canuckhooker 19203]

Yes, the thread got derailed. It happens. We've gone from contracts to appropriate payment procedure to review fraud. Conversations evolve. It's pretty common when I'm sitting around the fire with friends that our chats get way off topic and even heated. Sometimes it comes back around to the original subject, sometimes it doesn't. I mean really, look how far off topic I am right now but does a discussion board conversation really need to be that rigid?

 

You've mentioned the derailment twice now and wished that we would get back on topic. Why not offer your thoughts on contracts and see if you can get us there?

 

Well I haven't had a chance to reply before now, but since the gauntlet has been thrown down, here goes.

 

First lets dispense with the BS that we are contracting for "companionship". What we are talking about is the selling of sexual services despite efforts of some to dance around that reality. We discuss a wide range of sexual services on here, not just FS.

 

So with that understanding we can assume a client and a provider have had some discussion of the services to be provided. So the first requirement of the contract is met. Both parties have an agreement on what is being contracted. It doesn't have to be in writing, or formal. It is just an agreement on what is to happen.

 

Then the next condition is an exchange of consideration. That is either the client paying (part or full) or the provider providing some or all of the service. Once one or the other does that, you have a valid contract.

 

Whether it is enforceable is the problem. An oral agreement can be problematic and can rapidly devolve into a "he said-she said" argument.

 

In the US this contract would not be vaild because you are contracting for an illegal service, as prostitution is illegal. In Canada however, it is legal, and this contract would be valid.

 

So the OP's question, as I understand it, was what recourse does he have when the agreed upon services are not provided. If he complies with his end of the agreement, and meets all the conditions, (good hygiene in my mind would be a condition) what does he do when the SP does not provide the agreed upon service?

 

In my mind unfortunately, he is probably SOL. It would be tough trying to enforce an oral contract, particularly in this industry. Most clients who feel they are aggrieved would be reluctant to seek a remedy because of the stigma attached to buying sexual services. That is what a lot of these folks count on. They can get away with it, because the victim won't complain.

 

Now let me be clear, I am not saying that the only person at fault in these situations is the provider. I am just answering the OP's question. There are problematic clients and there are problematic providers. If all providers were perfect there would be no need for something like the Cowboy's Diary.

 

For the client it is a Caveat Emptor situation, and it pays for any client to do his research, from a variety of sources. Please don't be as naive to say something like "stick with the lovely ladies of CERB". Granted there is a very high percentage of awesome and honest ladies on this site, but not everyone is perfect and we all know about shill posts, and other problems. Those problems may not be severe enough to be posted in the warning section, but they cannot be discussed in the review section either.

[Guest realnicehat]

I agree with a lot of what you have said canuckhooker.

 

Where I have a problem with the idea of a contract, and this may or may not be only me, is that I almost never discuss services with a provider up front. In fact I can't recall discussing them in person either. I tend to book based on both physical attraction and personality rather than a checklist. Once I arrive I just go with the flow and let nature take its course.

 

So from this perspective, the only contract I have with the lady is an exchange of money for time. Should I be shown the door thirty minutes in to an hour appointment then yes, I have every right to be upset (assuming I've played by the rules). But as no services have been specifically discussed I really can't complain if the FK isn't as D as I'd hoped.

 

I kind of liken it to the entertainment industry (I know ladies, I know. You hate the comparisons but hear me out). If I go to a Bon Jovi concert (they're still cool right?) and the band walks off the stage after twenty minutes then fuck yes, I want my money back. If, however, they do a two hour show but neglect to play Livin' on a Prayer can I go bang on the box office window?

 

c.h. is right, it is certainly a buyer beware situation. Even when you have done your homework sometimes, as with anything involving two people, you just don't mesh well. Maybe I'm more careful than I think, or maybe I'm just really lucky but it has been a long time since I've walked away from an appointment dissatisfied. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that I enter the arrangement with a fairly open mind rather than thinking "these are the things that I need to happen". This is why I mentioned earlier that I am very interested in the correlation between booking styles (planned vs. spur of the moment), how/where one selects their ladies (established vs. "first time in town"), expectations and overall satisfaction.

 

Could somebody smart please do a study and get back to me?

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

If you want to get technical, I don't think you can even have a "contract" between a provider and a client. Yes, you can have oral contracts but more importantly than agreement, legality of object, legal capacity and consideration, you must have genuine intention. How can you have a genuine intention when you state ymmv, or your pics are not current or even your breast were enhanced and you concealed that info? I'm not saying these are wrong in the SP/provider relationship but concealment could certainly void a contract, if I recall properly the elements of a contract.

 

The best you can hope for in these interactions is an understanding of what is to take place.

 

I am not a lawyer and resent any implications. :)

[canuckhooker 19203]

If you want to get technical, I don't think you can even have a "contract" between a provider and a client. Yes, you can have oral contracts but more importantly than agreement, legality of object, legal capacity and consideration, you must have genuine intention. How can you have a genuine intention when you state ymmv, or your pics are not current or even your breast were enhanced and you concealed that info? I'm not saying these are wrong in the SP/provider relationship but concealment could certainly void a contract, if I recall properly the elements of a contract.

 

The best you can hope for in these interactions is an understanding of what is to take place.

 

I am not a lawyer and resent any implications. :)

 

I think you will find that there is a contract. The fact that someone has done something misleading in the agreement is the issue the OP raised. Which in terms of law is fraud. You promise one thing, and deliver another after there has been a change of consideration. Now whether you can prove it in court is another issue. That is if you wanted to pursue legal remedies.

[fortunateone 156618]

I also think there is a contract of sorts. I agree to provide sexual services based on receiving payment for them. Someone who does not pay, or steals the 'envelope' back after receiving services has broken that agreement, and is subject to charges or the equivalent of charges. I also am not a lawyer, but in some extreme situations, an argument in a sexual assault case involving an sp is that she is an sp, and therefore gave consent. The judge disagrees, stating she agrees to this based on being paid. If the aggressor does not pay, he is commiting sexual assault (this being in a case of actual sexual assault, not a client refusing to pay, mind you).

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Without "all" the elements of a contract, there can be no contract. You may think you have entered into a contract with a minor but unless it is for the necessities of life you are SOL. The same goes for fraud or concealment that exists while forming the supposed contract. It negates the contract. You might try and recoup losses but not under contract law.

Perhaps this is where an actual lawyer could step in and confirm or refute my assumptions, but I think I'm right.

Without all the element of a contract in place all you have is an understanding.

[almost_anonymous 100]

Very interesting discussion. IMHO, the issues raised by the OP are all addressed by the law of contract. People can enter into an agreement to do just about anything, subject to certain limits (I.e.: legality). It's a business like any other that doesn't require special rules; and as long as the terms agreed are clear to all involved, the parties can look to contract law to settle disputes.

 

Parties can agree to buy/sell one's time or certain services (provided it is done outside the public space), the key is the clarity of the terms. If ymmv, so long as it's clear, then ymmv. If other conditions apply, then they need to be clear too. While the substance may be different, these are the same issues faced by anyone who offers a service to clients - it is very important to clearly set out the terms of service.

 

Timing of payment is merely another term. In this context, the sellers not only appear to have the bargaining power to require payment in advance, it secures payment prior to the delivery of service (happens in other disciplines as well - call it a retainer). It's just a smart business practice, Otherwise, once service is delivered, there is no way to secure payment.

 

This does not mean there is no way to deal with a breach of the terms of the agreement by the seller. If the agreement was for a service that wasn't performed (the breach), as suggested above a dissatisfied client could be compensated through the seller's voluntary decision to ensure the buyer's satisfaction (protect brand/reputation). Always the best solution. Otherwise, the buyer could seek to enforce the contract in the same manner as any other person - through the courts. Might not be appealing given one's desire for discretion/anonymity, but enforcing one's legal rights is a personal decision (you can lead a horse to water...).

 

Sellers could enforce through the courts as well. I doubt it will happen anytime soon, but a judge holding up this type an agreement might serve to legitimize the practice in the eyes of the public and policy makers (see Harper's comments on prostitution in the throne speech).

[almost_anonymous 100]

Well I haven't had a chance to reply before now, but since the gauntlet has been thrown down, here goes.

 

First lets dispense with the BS that we are contracting for "companionship". What we are talking about is the selling of sexual services despite efforts of some to dance around that reality. We discuss a wide range of sexual services on here, not just FS.

 

So with that understanding we can assume a client and a provider have had some discussion of the services to be provided. So the first requirement of the contract is met. Both parties have an agreement on what is being contracted. It doesn't have to be in writing, or formal. It is just an agreement on what is to happen.

 

Then the next condition is an exchange of consideration. That is either the client paying (part or full) or the provider providing some or all of the service. Once one or the other does that, you have a valid contract.

 

Whether it is enforceable is the problem. An oral agreement can be problematic and can rapidly devolve into a "he said-she said" argument.

 

In the US this contract would not be vaild because you are contracting for an illegal service, as prostitution is illegal. In Canada however, it is legal, and this contract would be valid.

 

So the OP's question, as I understand it, was what recourse does he have when the agreed upon services are not provided. If he complies with his end of the agreement, and meets all the conditions, (good hygiene in my mind would be a condition) what does he do when the SP does not provide the agreed upon service?

 

In my mind unfortunately, he is probably SOL. It would be tough trying to enforce an oral contract, particularly in this industry. Most clients who feel they are aggrieved would be reluctant to seek a remedy because of the stigma attached to buying sexual services. That is what a lot of these folks count on. They can get away with it, because the victim won't complain.

 

Now let me be clear, I am not saying that the only person at fault in these situations is the provider. I am just answering the OP's question. There are problematic clients and there are problematic providers. If all providers were perfect there would be no need for something like the Cowboy's Diary.

 

For the client it is a Caveat Emptor situation, and it pays for any client to do his research, from a variety of sources. Please don't be as naive to say something like "stick with the lovely ladies of CERB". Granted there is a very high percentage of awesome and honest ladies on this site, but not everyone is perfect and we all know about shill posts, and other problems. Those problems may not be severe enough to be posted in the warning section, but they cannot be discussed in the review section either.

 

What he said too, there is a big difference between having a claim and being able to prove it, particularly with oral contracts.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Good points almost anonymous. You sound like you are very familiar with contract law.

 

I'm curious how you can have an actual contract, verbal or written, when the contract terms remain unclear due to the nature of this business. The SP say's you are paying only for her time, whereas the hobbyist(client) is certainly expecting more than just her time. There is a lot of wink, wink going on, in a sense. My issue with this is there is no true meeting of the minds, or at least there is lots of wiggle room to make me think a contract would be difficult to create in this type relationship. Doesn't a contract require a meeting of the minds? Not to mention my concealment/fraud issues mentioned in an earlier post.

 

I'm not questioning your expertise but instead just curious if I'm way off base in my thinking here.

 

Thanks for your input and welcome to the board!

 

Steve

[Gia Wren Marlowe 67985]

I think this has been brought up before, although perhaps it was on another thread, but you cannot have any legal contract that forces a person to perform a sexual act, or that punishes him or her for failing to perform that act. There are other rights that take precedence over contract law. So in terms of talking about a legal contract that can be enforced, I don't believe there can be one.

 

In terms of compensation made to the client if a discussed act was not performed, I think that is fair if the provider agrees that the decision not to offer the service was not the fault of the client. I think it is a matter of reputation and professionalism on the part of the provider that is in her best interest. I also think that most clients are good people who don't deserve to go in with understandable expectations and then feel that they were deliberately misled and swindled. But I also think that the SP in question is the one best able to determine whether or not delivery of services was reasonable under the circumstances. I don't think forcing her to prove, somehow, to some kind of enforcement agency that she couldn't reasonably be expected to perform the act is possible. Putting someone in the position where they have to prove the impossible (how can she prove he was rude, or not clean?), or face punishment of some kind (financial, in this case) would leave a sense that a provider must do what sexual acts she's told or else. Especially when most contracts are apparently verbal. How does she prove she didn't agree to what he says she did? I assume the onus would be on him, but hopefully you see what I am aiming at. Talking about enforcing contracts leaves a lot of room for abuse and intimidation.

 

Even if the contract is written (in emails, for example), in terms of enforcing that, how does a client prove that he did, in fact, have impeccable hygiene, or that he did not act offensively toward the provider? He's not any better able to prove his side of things than she is. As other's have pointed out, even if it were a contract enforcible by law, which I believe it isn't, there is so much he said/she said that I don't see any way to make a fair decision. And in terms of the decision, if a woman promises uncovered oral over the phone, and then declines during the encounter, what would one sue for? A $20 refund? $10 000 for mental anguish, including loss of self esteem? Again, I don't think potential punishment should hang over the head of a woman you are asking to perform sexual services for you.

 

I understand that legal contracts were brought up to point out that there should be some protection for the client when contracting services, or simply out of curiously for how it would play out given the changing laws. But I am very, very uncomfortable with talk of enFORCING that sexual services be delivered. I do wish there were a way, other than doing a lot of research (I understand that sometimes anyone might want to make an impulse purchase of services with a feeling of safety) that would give clients some kind of guarantee that their money will be well-spent and their encounter will unfold as they hope. But whenever I look at punishing someone for not delivering sexual services it just gets a bit of a rapey vibe for me.

 

Weighing the loss of money vs coercion to perform sexual acts, I find the loss on money is less bad. And I hold to that even as a client, since I sometimes see female MAs myself. I completely understand that clients feel they are always left without sympathy or recourse, so I hope this post hasn't sounded confrontational or, I don't know, lecturing. I'm just trying to show that the idea of having an enforcible contract in practice is not really workable.

[canuckhooker 19203]

And here is unfortunately where misunderstandings occur, and I must respectfully disagree with Georgiana on some of her wording.

 

First of all for a contract to be valid both parties have to agree on what is to be delivered and for what consideration. So that has to happen first. If one of the parties is coerced, as in any other contract, it would not be valid. So at the outset the provider is not compelled or coerced. They have willingly agreed to be party to the contract. We are all adults here, and we all seem to be proud that we do what we do of our own free will. So I doubt there is any coercion at the outset.

 

Secondly the word punishes for failing to hold up one's end of the bargain is really not the correct word. It is not punishment. In a contract, the aggrieved party can seek relief or remedy for the failure of the other party to deliver. In most cases the offending party is not forced to provide the service in question, it generally means they must return any money or other consideration provided by the other party. It is financial relief, and any provable damages.

 

It is correct that you frequently hear of punitive damages in civil cases, but that is generally applied where there has been physical harm to one party. They are very rare in Canada and usually only applied where there is proven malice on the part of the offending party.

 

So in no way have I been discussing forcing someone to deliver sexual services, and I don't think anyone else here has been either. We were not "weighing the loss of money against coercion to perform sexual acts".

 

We are discussing, in theory, what remedies a legitimately aggrieved client has. We have all noted that it would be virtually impossible to take one of these cases to court unless it was on a huge scale. Something akin to the recent fraud case against the escort in Hull, but that was a criminal case and not a civil case. I am not sure if the client there has sought civil remedies to get his money back. It would be an interesting case.

 

I too don't want to sound confrontational but I am a bit sensitive when I see words like coerced, compelled, punishing, "rapey vibe", when that was never discussed in this thread. I don't think anyone here would think or expect a court to force someone to provide a sexual service. What they may expect however is that some financial restitution might be granted. However, my perverted side does see the absurd, dark and warped kind of Monty Python-esque skit that could result from the former case.

 

"The court has found you guilty of failing to provide the defendant a BBBJ. I hereby order that the plaintiff be taken to the court showers, where he will get squeaky clean, paying particular attention to his genital region. Be sure to pull that foreskin back, and use soap.

 

Once he is clean he is to be taken to my chambers where the defendant will fellate him without a condom until completion. The Bailiff will be present to ensure you swallow every drop."

[almost_anonymous 100]

Definitely not an expert, learned out of necessity for my business. You are spot on regarding implied/assumed terms existing given the nature of a business, but I think they have to be universal in that all persons in that industry recognize them as assumed.

 

The 'wink, wink' aspect of many of these agreements is, I think, a product of the desire for secrecy/discretion, but makes these agreements vague. I have learned the hard way that if you have an expectation, it is best that the agreement clearly address it or you may not be entitled to it. This way a meeting of the minds is ensured. If you are being coy and not clearly communicating your expectations, the other party cannot consider them and no one can say that there is a agreement to satisfy them.

 

Again, I am extrapolating my business experiences to the discussion at hand, it might not fit, but the more similarities that can be drawn to other industries generally, the better the chance this industry will be treated like others.

 

 

 

Good points almost anonymous. You sound like you are very familiar with contract law.

 

I'm curious how you can have an actual contract, verbal or written, when the contract terms remain unclear due to the nature of this business. The SP say's you are paying only for her time, whereas the hobbyist(client) is certainly expecting more than just her time. There is a lot of wink, wink going on, in a sense. My issue with this is there is no true meeting of the minds, or at least there is lots of wiggle room to make me think a contract would be difficult to create in this type relationship. Doesn't a contract require a meeting of the minds? Not to mention my concealment/fraud issues mentioned in an earlier post.

 

I'm not questioning your expertise but instead just curious if I'm way off base in my thinking here.

 

Thanks for your input and welcome to the board!

 

Steve

[almost_anonymous 100]

Another interesting issue raised by Georgiana Sweet, but I agree with canuckhooker. I think a contract can only be enforced through legal means, so I don't believe there is any lawful way to force someone to perform a sexual act against their will. Like most other breached contracts, the guilty party would merely have to pay.

 

The amount would be open for argument, there are principle the court routinely uses to determine the amount. If pain and suffering/anguish could be proved (unlikely), then the harmed party should be entitled.