How would you respond to the complaint?
I think it would be a riot as a defendant....but I'm sure some guys would be really pissed about the outing issue. However if a gal did sue she'd also be outed. So fellas...would you try and "settle" quietly or go bonkers on the hooker?Sneaky bastard. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Seems like you've got me there LOL
Too bad I can't really post her diatribe in all it's glory. Can I?
It would be a PSA though....hookers like her need to be taken seriously as dangerous to the community.
Not that I am actually involved with this, but we both know who you are talking about, and you raised the very same issue that I did.
The other thing is that some guys like me are "black mail proof" I think a BSC hooker would be ill advised to sue someone who doesn't care who knows that he fucks hookers, but it would make great fodder for some daytime TV show. I can see both Judge Judy and Dr Phil having a field day with this.
It's black letter law that she can't sue to enforce the terms of an illegal contract. As for outing -- once she files the complaint, you're already outted, so you might as well fight it. I don't see the benefit in settling quietly. Maybe you can countersue for a frivolous lawsuit, or maybe defamation, but that invites her to bring forth any evidence she has on you. Better to move to dismiss at an early stage. You wouldn't even need a lawyer, really. Judges are accustomed to pro se litigants in small claims court.
I guess it's no small coincidence that a certain BSC hooker came and vanished again over the weekend on the GD and NOW you post this? Interesting...
Ok, what YOU should do...er, I mean what I would do, is negotiate it down since that is what I do best with hookers, and settle out of court.
But otoh, I avoid the BSC's like the plague to begin with and play with mostly ditzy art school types who couldn't even find the court and have never heard of a cancellation fee, so this may not be your best piece of advice. :
But check with an Illinois lawyer before you do ANYTHING.
I would think...based on this particular hookers over the top narcissism, that she would allege a material amount of damages LOL
And a jackass like me (who arguably has nothing better to do with my time or money) would file a counter-complaint just to jack up the costs to the hooker.
No fucking way would I allow that to play out in a small claims courtroom. Nope...I would want the pomp and circumstance.
So you didn't answer the OP...settle or bounce all over her?
Cancelation before the contract is consummated leaves you (hopefully) within the 72-hour law (if that applies in Illinois). I'm not a lawyer, but putting aside illegal activities (rimshot), nothing resulted to constitute breach. So, IMO, flip her a nickel, hope she can't catch, and watch her grub it out of the gutter.
Just thinking out loud.
Tell the judge, we had a date for fuck each other and I had to cancel. Now, she wants a cancellation fee.
Dear Sir (or Madam):
Some idiot is using your stationery.
Sincerely,
mrfisher
I rather settle silently but on one condition - "make up sex" is a requirement..
How are you CPA?
kind kisses below..
Miss Piers
The gal being hired for something other than P4P. That being said it would be quite entertaining to reply to the complaint as a "fuck off" followed by a set of interogatories and discovery.
Then the defendant can ask the court to have plaintiffs attorney explain the illegal nature of the transaction being litigated.
I can think that for some guys this could be a very entertaining adventure.
It was merely a breach of the girls policy PRIOR to any transaction or future illegality. And then, as you state, her attorney's argument would be she is an "escort", which is legal.
Wouldn't it be a blast to see the damages claim?
It sounds like it might be an extortion attempt. That's bad...isn't it?
That would take all the fun out of it.
-- Modified on 6/18/2014 8:32:47 PM
Sounds like it would entail wire fraud. Maybe wait till she also perjures herself.
It would be fun for the whole family.
Restatement 2nd Contracts
§ 86. Promise For Benefit Received
(1) A promise made in recognition of a benefit previously received by the promisor from the promisee is binding to the extent necessary to prevent injustice.
(2) A promise is not binding under Subsection (1)
(a) if the promisee conferred the benefit as a gift or for other reasons the promisor has not been unjustly enriched; or
(b) to the extent that its value is disproportionate to the benefit.
Comment:
a. "Past consideration"; "moral obligation." Enforcement of promises to pay for benefit received has sometimes been said to rest on "past consideration" or on the "moral obligation" of the promisor, and there are statutes in such terms in a few states. Those terms are not used here: "past consideration" is inconsistent with the meaning of consideration stated in § 71, and there seems to be no consensus as to what constitutes a "moral obligation." The mere fact of promise has been thought to create a moral obligation, but it is clear that not all promises are enforced. Nor are moral obligations based solely on gratitude or sentiment sufficient of themselves to support a subsequent promise.
Illustrations:
1. A gives emergency care to B's adult son while the son is sick and without funds far from home. B subsequently promises to reimburse A for his expenses. The promise is not binding under this Section.
2. A lends money to B, who later dies. B's widow promises to pay the debt. The promise is not binding under this Section.
3. A has immoral relations with B, a woman not his wife, to her injury. A's subsequent promise to reimburse B for her loss is not binding under this Section.
b. Rationale. Although in general a person who has been unjustly enriched at the expense of another is required to make restitution, restitution is denied in many cases in order to protect persons who have had benefits thrust upon them. See Restatement of Restitution §§ 1, 2, 112. In other cases restitution is denied by virtue of rules designed to guard against false claims, stale claims, claims already litigated, and the like. In many such cases a subsequent promise to make restitution removes the reason for the denial of relief, and the policy against unjust enrichment then prevails. Compare Restatement, Second, Agency § 462 on ratification of the acts of a person who officiously purports to act as an agent. Enforcement of the subsequent promise sometimes makes it unnecessary to decide a difficult question as to the limits on quasi-contractual relief.
Many of the cases governed by the rules stated in §§ 82-85 are within the broader principle stated in this Section. But the broader principle is not so firmly established as those rules, and it may not be applied if there is doubt whether the objections to restitution are fully met by the subsequent promise. Facts such as the definite and substantial character of the benefit received, formality in the making of the promise, part performance of the promise, reliance on the promise or the probability of such reliance may be relevant to show that no imposition results from enforcement.
c. Promise to correct a mistake. One who makes a mistake in the conferring of a benefit is commonly entitled to restitution regardless of any promise. But restitution is often denied to avoid prejudice to the recipient of the benefit. Thus restitution of the value of services or of improvements to land or chattels may require a payment which the recipient cannot afford. See Restatement of Restitution §§ 41, 42. Where a subsequent promise shows that the usual protection is not needed in the particular case, restitution is granted to the extent promised.
If Whapner were on the bench. He would give that hooker a once over for being such a bad girl you know.
Check it! I said Hooker! 👯👯👯
and make a list of demands for compensation. Then I would have her deposed under oath and send the deposition minutes to the IRS. Bonkers, I guess.
After the fireworks you can contact CID of the IRS who'll have a field day with her.
Sex sells.
I'd love to see the list of "character" witnesses she'd present. Maybe make it a M & G?
Let her character witness loosen up a bit (in more ways then one) before their testimony.
I think it would be a riot as a defendant....but I'm sure some guys would be really pissed about the outing issue. However if a gal did sue she'd also be outed.
So fellas...would you try and "settle" quietly or go bonkers on the hooker?
Now, I, on the other hand, always comport myself with nothing but the highest regard for the dignity and sanctity of the courtroom, as evidenced by this file footage of one of my early trials:
This heinee even wrote it out in numbers... Burns?
-- Modified on 6/19/2014 8:48:10 AM
According to most advertisements, you're not paying for sex. You are paying for time, companionship and modeling. As your defense are you going to show up and admit to the crime of pandering? Why in the world would you want to show up in court at all? "Bailiff, take dumbass into custody for a police hold please." All that other stupid stuff, i.e. depositions, filing an answer, mounting a spirited defense is going to cost you more than the cancellation fee, which you agreed to pay when you booked her in the first place. Why be a douche bag about it?
-- Modified on 6/18/2014 9:40:09 PM
Only a dog would have taken this thread seriously.
The provider in question seemed serious, though admittedly one can never be sure. But she does have a history of having gone to court in at least one other circumstance. She also claimed in a PM to me that she'd contacted her lawyer to deal with someone else I know. Of course it could have just been an idle threat but it was definitely not delivered as a joke. She's scary.
Woof.
I may want to test the waters, lol.
Crazy hookers!
Anything is possible. There is no sanity test at the filing window.
Can you be sued into breaking the law?
That the cancellation was given with a number of weeks notice. Yet the hooker is "upset" that the john bailed on her. And then rants all over some boards that "she's going to teach him a lesson" and sue him for damages.
Well...some dudes would cave in to that type of extortion...others like me would play with the opportunity to create havoc.
Only 2 reasons people file lawsuits...one is to get money, the other is to inflict pain.
I guess you're in the camp of just caving in to an extortion attempt. Oh well. I don't respond well to threats, so my reaction is to go bonkers on someone. Money would not be an issue...it's just another form of entertainment for assholes like me.
-- Modified on 6/18/2014 9:40:09 PM
There are a ton of more reasons people sue each other. As I said above there is no sanity test at the filing window. You say money is no object, but believe me at $400.00 an hour with a $10,000.00 retainer up front for the defense case, it may become an object pretty fast. Even the most BS case is a case you need to deal with. Attorneys love clients who want to fight to the bitter end. Helps pay for the second home and the mistresses.
This also answers another troubling question in the biosciences - How do you make a hormone?
Don't pay her. (Rim shot)
-- Modified on 6/19/2014 8:11:48 AM
Some guys like to play the ponies...others fuck hookers...some would (and do) litigate for the joy(s) of it. Perhaps all three.
And nope...only 2 reasons as I stated. Variations on those themes but in the end it comes down to just 2 reasons.
Some of my attorney pals wouldn't touch a case as I have described with ONLY a $ 10k retainer. As well I would suggest that it would also end up being over $ 1k+/hour since many firms would have multiple attorneys on the case. Don't you know how that game works? LOL
This also answers another troubling question in the biosciences - How do you make a hormone?
Don't pay her. (Rim shot)
-- Modified on 6/19/2014 8:11:48 AM
It's no wonder these people are baffled when an attorney bills them 200 hours in a single week. lol
Inflicting pain is a gesture. This woman doesn't sound very nice, smart, worldly, or for that matter, very sensual. Maybe the client gleaned some of that before actually meeting her and decided to pass. That doesn't leave her with much of a case, IMO.
Well...some dudes would cave in to that type of extortion...others like me would play with the opportunity to create havoc.
Only 2 reasons people file lawsuits...one is to get money, the other is to inflict pain.
I guess you're in the camp of just caving in to an extortion attempt. Oh well. I don't respond well to threats, so my reaction is to go bonkers on someone. Money would not be an issue...it's just another form of entertainment for assholes like me.
-- Modified on 6/18/2014 9:40:09 PM
but you nailed this one.
I find it ironic just how much fun we are having at her expense.
my wise dad used to say "if a woman asks for money, give it to her"
someone should have told that to the Duke lacrosse players
... you cancelled on her and didn't pay her cancellation fee?
Shame on you!
Would I try to settle with her if I were in your shoes. No.
Why?
Because, I like to see her try to explain herself in court and all of this shit will be public record. Admitting to illegals acts is a sure fire way of ending her provider career.
Don't know about your career, though and I couldn't care less what happens to you.
The Forest Waits
I think it would be a riot as a defendant....but I'm sure some guys would be really pissed about the outing issue. However if a gal did sue she'd also be outed.
So fellas...would you try and "settle" quietly or go bonkers on the hooker?
Glad you would do what I would do as well....us "assholes" have to stick together 
It would be a lot of fun to watch how this would unfold.
Sorry...it isn't a scenario I'm in...nor likely would ever be. But some poor fool is about to find out if the hooker I'm alluding to goes through with her "threats".
Popcorn for everyone LOL
If by chance that you have seen this provider before... it probably be wise to stay the hell away from her no matter how good she is.
I don't care if her ratings are 10/10 ... I'd stay away from any hint of drama or potential drama. I get enough of that shit in my civilian life.
The Forest Waits
It would be a lot of fun to watch how this would unfold.
Sorry...it isn't a scenario I'm in...nor likely would ever be. But some poor fool is about to find out if the hooker I'm alluding to goes through with her "threats".
Popcorn for everyone LOL
Cancellation fee? Threatening to sue sounds like pure BLACKMAIL. That is such WRONG behavior and makes this biz more difficult for the ladies who handle their clients with care and discretion.
Other men need to know if there is a lady perpetrating on them in this fashion.
If this lady expects money if a fellow cancels she needs to be asking for a fee/non-refundable deposit up front for her to keep IN CASE the client cancels.
Cancellations are a fact of life.
When I hear about skeevy behavior it really makes me mad since so many men feel they have no recourse or defense.
I don't think you can be accused of blackmail for filing a lawsuit. THREATENING to take legal action, and citing the REASONS you'd sue, maybe.
It's like firing an employee for no reason. Just don't need him in that position. No harm, no foul. BUT if you say you're firing him because he's black or Irish or a Peace & Freedom party member, that's something else. Of threatening to fire him if he doesn't come over on his weekend and mow your lawn... see where this goes?
Why would you hire them in the first place?
I'd never do business with someone that stupid.
-- Modified on 6/19/2014 5:36:10 PM
Ever change through out some one's work history. Except religious or political affiliation, hey if you can't tell if someoneis a dumbass before hiring them... you work for a dumbass.
And the person doing the hiring isn't always the same as the person doing the firing. Don't they have HR where you come from?
It was an example of cause and no cause being different. Try to keep up with the general flow.
Could they be sued for being no-shows?
What if you had a session and nobody...wait, that happens all the time.