What’s the consensus of the board? Too much risk? Reasonable request?

Forget getting physically caught in the act, what actually happens to you if said agency gets busted and that information is on the hard drive?

Anything? Can you get in any legal trouble for an act that has already transpired? My impression was that short of embarrassment, a client list couldn’t be used for much.

I’m a single dude working in an industry where such things aren’t closely scrutinized… but still wary of handing out that kind of information.

Already have seen two agencies I’ve been the patron of get rolled up, but had used P411 as my foot in the door with them, so they just had my first name and a throwaway email… Nothing ever came of it.

Thoughts? Do you bother insulating yourself this way, or is that worrying too much?

And it's non-negotiable to me.

My privacy means more to me than any pussy, and considering I tend to tell it like it is and fight for mongers rights online, it's outright unsafe for me to provide real info. I'd be opening myself to extortion.

 
I'm in with quite many Korean orgs and all they have is my first name (which is more like my name, not my govt name) and my age and race as well as phone number . Nothing more. Not a selfie (always refuse it), not paystubs not LinkedIn profile (hell to the nah)  

 
As far as worst case scenario, you probably can be indicted if your name is on the list and you're a person of interest. On average, it is relatively safe. If you piss off orgs, for example by posting non favorable reviews, the might use it to block you and maybe even tell other orgs to block you.  

Again, this is for Korean orgs only.

It’s a such a shame that the two best agencies in the closest city to me both require a screenshot of your drivers license and the name/phone number of your employer…

…that employer phone number in particular could cause real issues for me even if we lived in a world where the rest of that info meant nothing… I work in a non-office environment where the response would be “why the hell is someone calling asking about you?”

I totally understand that ladies have to make sure we are vouched for, screened and safe to deal with. Wouldn’t expect anything less… but in the past I’ve always left this to the 3rd party screening sites to “okay” me.

that do not require overly intrusive screening, so there is no need to put yourself at risk.  It takes a little time, but as long as you have VIP and can read the details of reviews, reviewers will sometimes mention what kinds of screening they had to go through to get the appointment.  I'm single, too, but being discovered in this biz could damage my professional reputation (at work, not as a DATY afficionado - lol), so I will pass on any provider who wants any more than the provider references I'm happy to supply.  Most guys create their own risks by feeling that there are providers that they absolutely HAVE to see, so they roll over for whatever the provider asks for in the way of screening.  Not me.  

That said, I'm not at all suggesting you should have no worries about giving out such information and will alwaus say make your own informed assessment of your risks in terms of informationprovided.

 
I there has been at least 3 agencies that have been busted since I began using agencies over 10 years ago. Not once have I been contacted or even felt as if anyone was looking into me at all. You should check the specifics of your area but most states and the USA has some limits on just what personally identifying information about a person that comes up in some investigation can be disclosed without charges having been made. If you do a google search you'll find some information, including some cases where people were actually guilty of the crime but were able to get significant awards (100K or million $ court settlement) for such disclosures.

 
I have given out a work email as par screening once. No issues there but it was a independent. But I don't recommend others do that and, like I said only once years ago. I've also provided a heavily redacted DL on a few occasions. But I don't think a name, state that issued, year of birth are any good in terms of evidence - unless you have a really unique name. The picture is a different story but even there being found in the database is very weak evidence of having commited the crime.

 
Last thing to think about is just the cost to the local juristidiction. Chasing a name, number or picture down from a contacts list is not that cheap, conducting all the legally required documentation and bureaucratic work is not either. The court case cost money. If someone is guilty and they get charged either the jail time or the parol time work costs money. Yes, some of that is a fixed cost aspect but a lot is going to be more of a marginal cost. The key cost being the oportunity cost of using those resources for other policing work and cases. Given most police forces are under staffed and under funded I just don't see strong incentives for the police or the DA to go after the average John on some list.

 
So if you're only being concerned about giving that type of information out due to concerns about potential legal problems I think you're being a bit stupid. The real legal risk you need to worry about is walking into and out of the door, not screening information provided. (If you've got some type of name recognition  that's a different story.) What you should be worried about is the potential for blackmail or identity theft.  I think these problems are much more likely in a case of those seeing independents just because it's a numbers game. The more times you hand out that information the more likely it is to be given to someone you wish you had not given it to. The established agencys that run dedicated web sites and have a brand name are much less likely to try some thing like blackmail.

So you have no fear that at no point somone perhaps not the provider will USE that data?

Just check the news and see what happened with an agency that had locations in Boston and Northern Virginia.

Kiss 💋  

Keep
It
Super  
Simple

Yikes. I had always been under the impression that clients weren’t really pursued or targeted by law enforcement after the fact just based on a client list…  

I mean, sure, there are  potentially stings to bust you at the hotel, always knew that…

Also figured they might release the list to embarrass, but thought they wouldn’t have the ability to truly bring charges since proving what went on in said hotel room months ago is more of a stretch from a criminal prosecution perspective…

Is there something unique about this case, or the laws in Boston? Because it seems absolutely nuts to me that they would hunt down the clients purely based on records and have that hold up in court…

END OF MESSAGE

Everyone seems to be asking for this nowadays. Even most of those on P411 are just using it for advertising and won't accept their verification even with okays.  

Saw an ad just today that asked for LinkedIn page if you have it and said it shouldn't be a problem because it's public information.

Yes it is, but it will be public information leading to private acts that can be life changing if publicly known.

This is why I rarely even think about hobbying any more. End up doing a cost/benefit analysis and concluding it's not worth the risk.

What exactly is causing you to change that impression? I've not seen anything (but am not following closely by any means) that suggests anyone has been summoned just because they were in the database. My current view, and until I see some reporting that says differently my view will remain, that those getting summons or might be charged once the hearings are conducted were the one's listed in the affidavit. Those, 28?, people apparently all admitted to their crimes when confronted by the Federal authorities.

 
But also, my understanding is that the whole "make public" is that the hearing will allow the public in but not that any of the defendents will be completely identified other than to DA and defense, and the court. Didn't sound like they are going to read off names and address and work places in the hearing for anyone there to know.

 
Given that it is not illegal to be on such a list LE releasing that list without having charged, or at least summoning them, is going to result in some major legal settlements for the police force or DA office, and likely restult in someone losing their job.

I'd rather get no pussy than to do it.

Funny thing is all these orgs use fake pics of their girls as well. They say it's for their safety but what about the other way around?

Yes you can. First of all, You knew what type of business it is when you engaged in the whole employment or whatever you want to call it.

I don’t save information. I respect everyone’s need for privacy. My primary concern is for my safety. No one wants to get embarrassed, or arrested. The entire purpose of this hobby lifestyle is to have fun.  No drama Mama…

Exactly! I delete it right after (I don’t want it taking up space in my phone anyway) it’s for my safety only.

the ONLY two choices.  here are still thousands of providers out there that will accept references from other providers for screening purposes.  This keeps your personal information private and safe.  When a provider says she deletes your information from her phone/computer AFTER the first meeting, try not to burst out laughing.  It doesn't help.   Lol

Yeah, with deposits, high rates, and screening, I pretty much pass on escorts these days.  Sugar babies are more user friendly.  

That is, I believe YOU. I will take you at your word. But the problem is that there are many providers who are not you. Some will keep the data. Some will misuse the data. Some (and I've seen this one first hand) will be careless about the data to the point that a vindictive boyfriend will get hold of it and misuse it. And of course there's the small but non-zero possibility of LE getting the data if the lady is busted. The problem is that the player won't know which type of lady he's dealing with until it's too late.

As I've said countless times on this board, everyone should do what they believe will keep themselves safe. Each time we opine here, we're using a sample set of one. Hard tell anyone else what they should or should not do on that basis.

It is not uncommon for independent providers to leverage the mongers pii info when they do something the providers don't like. Such as, but not limited to : mediocre reviews and criticism in general, not following the communication rules outlined (it's OK to stop communicating if the rules are broken but to expose the mongers pii is just vile) and so on and so forth.

 
Id also argue that because of lower volume, independent providers tend to remember details of encounters a lot better and hence are able identify authors of reviews they don't like and march them to pii info. And then air em out.

 
Now I'm not saying anyone here does it, but because such risk exists and I've seen unhinged providers air out pii of some poor schmucks... I feel like this must be mentioned.

Sorry Ms Bia but how are you any different when you have this on your website: "Verification...Send a Selfie holding your real Identification & smile for Bia!"

That post's main purpose was obvious self-promotion.

They have your phone number. People don't understand that's all LE would ever need.

LE does not give a fuck about someone's name being on a list. That's worthless for an indictment. Read the Boston 10 indictment. They literally filmed and conducted surveillance. That's real evidence. That's what they want, proof of you physically being there not hearsay.

With the agencies I've worked with? Not really, no. I think they have much more incentive to keep customers happy and repeating than could be gained by trying to extort -- not to mention that would increase the legal risks to them. But I'm also aware that the risk to me would be more about identity theft rather than extortion/blackmail or legal (though that would have some negative aspects and costs -- but those are always present every time you showup). But since even more information is available publicly about me that can be used for identiy theft than I give to the agency I don't really see that as increasing my risk level.  

 
I would say that I think those seeing independants have a slightly different setting. I work with an agency and then see a bunch of providers through them that never see my information. All the independets will see whatever screening the guy provides so you have a lot more chances to come across a bad actor -- so the calculation should be a bit different.

 
As for LE doing something with a client list, no I don't think that's an issue either. I've been  client with two or three agencies that have been busted over the years. Never has any LE agent contacted me or seems to be showing any interest in me. As the other response notes, the client list is pretty useless evidence for making an arrest. It is also likely (unless you're someone special) very poor information to start a deeper investigation into anyone.