January 15th, 2010


Posted in The Job - General by 200

A word of warning to all my readers who use the services of a professional lady of the night.

The recently enacted Police and Crime Act 2009 has introduced a new law which may be of concern; Section 14 of the new act introduces an amendment to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 – Section 53a – Paying for sexual services of a prostitute subjected to force, etc.

To cut a long story short, if you are going to pay for sex you need to ensure that your prostitute of choice is not being subjected to force or coersion on order to sell her wares.

Designed to protect females against exploitation, there is no defence if you, as a client, dont know that the prostitute is being encouraged by coersion, into her trade by a third party – or pimp.

So make sure you’re happy she’s selling her body of her own free will otherwise you will be subject to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale (I have no idea how much that is either).

You can skip to the end and leave a comment. Pinging is currently not allowed. RSS 2.0


  1. john says:

    Standard scale of fines:
    1 £200
    2 £500
    3 £1,000
    4 £2,500
    5 £5,000

    January 16th, 2010 at 11:33

  2. john says:

    Note the wording:

    “makes or promises”

    January 16th, 2010 at 11:34

  3. bill says:

    “A word of warning to all my readers who use the services of a professional lady of the night.”

    Wouldn’t it have been less of a sweeping generalisation to have said “to those of my readers”?

    Or, have you been checking us all out on the PNC?

    January 16th, 2010 at 16:01

  4. bender the robot says:

    too right bill- and it should have been ‘that uses’ instead of ‘who’…

    January 16th, 2010 at 16:46

  5. 200 says:

    sorry bill, I really shouldn’t judge others by my own standards, eh?

    January 16th, 2010 at 17:40

  6. Joe says:

    I believe there is some research which indicates that most of the ladies involved in the trade are in it for the money – no compulsion. I don’t want to minimise the abhorence of sex trafficing but if it’s largely an economic choice why should Harperson stick her oar in – if it’s not I would have thought the existing law was adaquate to cover the position (but when has that stopped this excuse for a government from adding to the statute book).

    January 17th, 2010 at 01:20

  7. john says:

    Laws usually follow a progression.
    Law made (to stop people being forced into prostitution)
    Law ineffective because few are, or will admit to, being forced.
    Law changed.
    New law. Customer has to obtain affidavit from service provider that he/she is doing it of his/her free will and then has to have 3 socially-acceptable witnesses to the fact of consent (1 police-person, 1 magistrate and 1 judge)
    Law still deemd unworking.
    New law.
    All males have to have consent from the Minister for Responsibility for Sexual Consent for Males, several sworn affidavits and 100 witnesses.
    New law unworkable so another new law will be passed: All males to have external genitalia surgically removed.
    It isn’t the laws that bother me, its the fact that those MAKING the laws are breaking them on a daily basis themselves…and that includes ALL political parties…and that I get fed-up with being told that I should respect women, by other women who are only interested in getting into the knickers of those disrespected women themselves ! (and that includes female politicians)

    January 17th, 2010 at 09:13

  8. Blueknight says:

    So it’s off to Amsterdam or Hamburg then. At least until the weather forecast improves and the ‘dogging season’ begins.

    January 18th, 2010 at 22:08

Leave a comment