Non payment of sexual services. Criminal or small claims court ?

[dchoye]

Read about a SP taking a client to small claims court for underpaying on agreed services
If SP was vile enough would she also be able to press charges for sexual assault in criminal court due to violation of nonpayment if client doesn’t pay for her services yet client still has sex with her?

 

[Leimonis]

Read about a SP taking a client to small claims court for underpaying on agreed services
If SP was vile enough would she also be able to press charges for sexual assault in criminal court due to violation of nonpayment if client doesn’t pay for her services yet client still has sex with her?

If she said yes to sex at the time it’s not an assault.
A fraud that came to light later does not vitiate consent.

 

[Daddy2021]

Read about a SP taking a client to small claims court for underpaying on agreed services
If SP was vile enough would she also be able to press charges for sexual assault in criminal court due to violation of nonpayment if client doesn’t pay for her services yet client still has sex with her?

Why is it the sp is the one that is vile and not the dirtbag that didn’t pay? And yes it can be charged as sexual assault as her consent to provide sexual services is based on payment. You don’t pay then she no longer provided consent. So word to the wise. Don’t be vile yourself and pay for services.

 

[Stoo]

And yes it can be charged as sexual assault as her consent to provide sexual services is based on payment. You don’t pay then she no longer provided consent. So word to the wise. Don’t be vile yourself and pay for services.

I know that this is the line taken by SPs, but has it ever been tested in court? I am genuinely curious and perhaps someone could provide a link to an actual case.

I agree though... don't be a prick and pay for what you were provided. My concern with this sort of thing is over "degrees" or misunderstandings. For example.... In the heat of an excellent session, the dude wants Greek. Lady says through mutual panting, "Sure, it's an extra $100". Dude, being a dude, hears the first part, misses the second, and suddenly finds himself charged with sexual assault and sodomy. I appreciate that this seems stupid, but there's always someone who thrives on stupid.

 

[dchoye]

As far as understanding it’s the form of sex contact that is considered sex assault Like when SP agreed to condoms and the clients removed the condom then steathing is now considered sex assault.
So the sex is consented and the type of sexual acts that was promised was not delivered, why does the client have to pay?
And if he doesn’t why it consider sexual assault ?

 

[Daddy2021]

As far as understanding it’s the form of sex contact that is considered sex assault Like when SP agreed to condoms and the clients removed the condom then steathing is now considered sex assault.
So the sex is consented and the type of sexual acts that was promised was not delivered, why does the client have to pay?
And if he doesn’t why it consider sexual assault ?

Because any sex of any kind is only consented to based on payment. Any sp would get payment before start of session almost always so it’s a moot point for the most part. I’m not sure what would be ruled upon in court but I certainly wouldn’t want the embarrassment of the case even going to court in the first place. Best to just pay the lady and not be a vile prick. That’s just my opinion.

 

[Leimonis]

Because any sex of any kind is only consented to based on payment.

Sex is consented to based on saying yes to it at the time.
Stiffing a SW after the fact is as much of a sex assault as stiffing your plumber is human trafficking and slavery.

That being said fucking with the Sw's payment is a good way of getting falsely charged

 

[Daddy2021]

Sex is consented to based on saying yes to it at the time.
Stiffing a SW after the fact is as much of a sex assault as stiffing your plumber is human trafficking and slavery.

That being said fucking with the Sw's payment is a good way of getting falsely charged

That’s pretty much my thinking. May not stand up in court but who wants to deal with that? Apart from it just being a shitty thing to do.

 

[MorganStanley1]

Wtf is going on in this world mannn

 

[Leimonis]

The client is committing three crimes in this case from a legal perspective:

1. Not paying for agreed service (small claims court)
2. Purchasing sexual services (Criminal offence)
3. Sexual Assault / Rape (Criminal offence).

Who is vile exactly , the rapist or the person being raped ?

here's what I think about that legal analysis

 

[Daddy2021]

here's what I think about that legal analysis
View attachment 334220

Who exactly is the clown in your perspective?

 

[Jenesis]

I know that this is the line taken by SPs, but has it ever been tested in court? I am genuinely curious and perhaps someone could provide a link to an actual case.

I agree though... don't be a prick and pay for what you were provided. My concern with this sort of thing is over "degrees" or misunderstandings. For example.... In the heat of an excellent session, the dude wants Greek. Lady says through mutual panting, "Sure, it's an extra $100". Dude, being a dude, hears the first part, misses the second, and suddenly finds himself charged with sexual assault and sodomy. I appreciate that this seems stupid, but there's always someone who thrives on stupid.

It has been tested in court.

It was considered fraud, not sexual assault. Something about it not being physical harm. I can’t exactly remember, but a guy was just taken to court and the judgment was a couple months ago.

I don’t think it was reported in the news so I have no link to provide. I just know an escort (retired) involved in the case.

 

[dchoye]

It has been tested in court.

It was considered fraud, not sexual assault. Something about it not being physical harm. I can’t exactly remember, but a guy was just taken to court and the judgment was a couple months ago.

I don’t think it was reported in the news so I have no link to provide. I just know an escort (retired) involved in the case.

Did she finally get paid ?

 

[Jenesis]

Did she finally get paid ?

No. At least not that I know of. There may have been restitution ordered. There were five girls in total and he got a lot of jail time. Like a few years worth.

 

[Stoo]

It has been tested in court.

It was considered fraud, not sexual assault. Something about it not being physical harm. I can’t exactly remember, but a guy was just taken to court and the judgment was a couple months ago.

I don’t think it was reported in the news so I have no link to provide. I just know an escort (retired) involved in the case.

Interesting... and much more "believable" than assault, which implies physical harm I believe. (Thank you!)

I noticed someone below asking if the lady was ever paid. I suspect that a successful conviction would open the door to a simple civil action. Given the relatively small amount of money involved, it would be a Small Claims Court action. That of course means the lady has to continue to "out" herself, so regardless of a successful judgment, it's still a "can't win" situation, for the lady involved, sadly.

 

[speakercontrols]

It has been tested in court.

It was considered fraud, not sexual assault. Something about it not being physical harm. I can’t exactly remember, but a guy was just taken to court and the judgment was a couple months ago.

I don’t think it was reported in the news so I have no link to provide. I just know an escort (retired) involved in the case.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/former-sex-worker-small-claims-court-national-precedent-1.6896597

A former sex worker in Nova Scotia has successfully sued a client in small claims court for non-payment of services. She and her advocates hope the decision will change the legal landscape for sex work in Canada.
'All the hallmarks of an enforceable contract'
Benefits of commercial law apply


But part of the immediate significance of the judgment, advocates say, is that it happened in a court that's relatively accessible; the law has been clarified that at the small-claims level, a contract for sexual services is enforceable.

That means that a sex worker who hasn't been paid by a client can now pursue that in small claims court without having to argue the law, so long as they have the supporting facts.

"Now they can bring this judgment and put it on the judges desk and say, 'here it is, there's precedent for it; I want my judgment,'" said Rose.

 

[Stoo]

No...he got a lot of jail time. Like a few years worth.

Fraud wouldn't typically involve jail time unless it's on a massive scale... Like Trump size. At most, there'd be restitution and and a fine, and possibly seizure of assets, but even that seems unlikely. I assume we're talking about a few thousand dollars... It's Small Claims Court territory. As someone mentioned earlier, this is no different than failing to pay a plumber.

 

[DerekMcCall]

There was a hot lil caribbean lady (like 5 feet small) who worked for cupids 2009-ish if memory correct.

She went by Raven at the time -- was Minnie Apple prior
different name once indy

someone reviewed her n said while having sex she just put his cock in her sexy lil butt
and afterwards demanded extra $50
he raved about her in review except for the sudden upcharge
He was not really into greek but went with the flow as she expressed her orgasm was coming

she did apologize in his review thread
believe it may have been on thir review board but not certain

He reluctantly gave the $50 but if had Not ??
I don't know


I met her briefly at Spearmint Rhino near YYZ that year and she was fucking sexy sexy

 

[DerekMcCall]

just did a search and found her last name on terb wasd riley daniels

she even has small tame amateur video on Phub
under Minnie St Claire