TGF took my deposit but then refused to book me in
This incident involves a booking dispute between a first-time client and Toronto Girlfriends (TGF), a Toronto escort agency, regarding their screening process and deposit policies.
TGF offers three screening options for new clients: a $25 non-refundable deposit, ID verification, or TERB account verification. The client initially attempted TERB verification but was told his account didn't meet requirements. He then chose the deposit option, sending $30 via electronic money transfer using a nickname rather than his legal name.
TGF refused to complete the booking, alleging the client attempted to circumvent their verification process by using what they considered a fake name. The agency maintained that the client was being deceptive after failing the initial TERB screening. The client argued that banks commonly allow nicknames for transfers and that TGF should have explicitly stated they required real names if that was their policy.
The dispute centers on whether the screening options were truly alternatives or if multiple forms of verification were required. TGF emphasized that client safety and proper identification are their priorities, while the client felt the process was misleading and unprofessional.
The agency offered to honor the deposit if proper screening was completed within 24 hours, though they reserved the right to decline service. However, the client refused to provide ID verification, citing privacy concerns, and requested his deposit be returned since no service would be provided.
Community opinion was mixed, with some supporting TGF's safety-focused approach while others felt the agency should refund the deposit given the apparent miscommunication about requirements. The "non-refundable" nature of the deposit remained a point of contention throughout the discussion.
TGF offers three screening options for new clients: a $25 non-refundable deposit, ID verification, or TERB account verification. The client initially attempted TERB verification but was told his account didn't meet requirements. He then chose the deposit option, sending $30 via electronic money transfer using a nickname rather than his legal name.
TGF refused to complete the booking, alleging the client attempted to circumvent their verification process by using what they considered a fake name. The agency maintained that the client was being deceptive after failing the initial TERB screening. The client argued that banks commonly allow nicknames for transfers and that TGF should have explicitly stated they required real names if that was their policy.
The dispute centers on whether the screening options were truly alternatives or if multiple forms of verification were required. TGF emphasized that client safety and proper identification are their priorities, while the client felt the process was misleading and unprofessional.
The agency offered to honor the deposit if proper screening was completed within 24 hours, though they reserved the right to decline service. However, the client refused to provide ID verification, citing privacy concerns, and requested his deposit be returned since no service would be provided.
Community opinion was mixed, with some supporting TGF's safety-focused approach while others felt the agency should refund the deposit given the apparent miscommunication about requirements. The "non-refundable" nature of the deposit remained a point of contention throughout the discussion.