Amy - good massage but....

[wangan]

This is my first review on aus99, but I've been around for a while, but I figured that I should at least share this experience.

Normally when I go for a massage, I usually head to Stanmore for Mimi (who of course no longer works there), or SilverFox, or Snow Lotus. but today I figured I'll try something a bit different. 429 Massage is a place that I drive by whenever I head to Stanmore so it's not hard to miss. It was my first time going to this place. I walked in through the from door, but they do have a backdoor for those who want to be discrete.

Once inside I was offered Amy by the Mama-san and took 1 hour, which cost me $120. Into the massage room, clothes off, and let Amy do her work. Amy is Thai, slim, and from what I can guess, she had D cups, which is what I like. Her massage was a bit soft at the start and I asked her to go a little harder which she happily obliged. After a good 30 mins it was time to turn over. She massage my legs a bit more before reaching for my LB. And this is where it goes downhill.

Now in a lot of RnT places I've been to, $120/hour would automatically mean nude HJ. However Amy kep stroking LB with her clothes on. I asked her about taking her clothes off and she said no. Tried to egg her on a bit but she still refused. Fine I'll just let her be. Tried touching her butt and that was OK. Tried reaching around for a feel for those D cups but she took a step back to be out of my reach. Her stroking at this point was getting much more rushed and with the disappointment I was facing it took me a little longer to release.

After she cleaned me up there was still about 15 mins to go, but Amy was nice enough to give me a nice head and shoulder massage. Time was up and I was asked if I wanted a shower. I declined and just asked for a hot towel since I kind of wanted to get out of there. All dressed and I exited through the backdoor this time.

Overall this place is pretty much a let down. $120/hour and no clothes off is such a ripoff compared to other places. If I wanted a legit Thai massage, I could go to a number of other places for much cheaper. In the end I definitely won't return. I'll just stick to Stanmore and the various places available in the CBD.

[aussiegaigin]

This experience doesn't seem to match up with a recent report of (presumably) the same Amy, which is in the private section (which you can't read).

[wangan]

Well I'm not sure what others have experienced. Maybe the Mama-san said her name was Amy but gave me someone else? Maybe I didn't click with Amy? I'm not sure, but as I said, I definitely won't be going back.

[slarty]

This experience doesn't seem to match up with a recent report of (presumably) the same Amy, which is in the private section (which you can't read).

That would be my review. With the site being down I haven't had a chance to put a version in this section. I had no issues with Amy's service and left well satisfied. I'm an infrequent visitor to this shop but it has been there for a long time so have been there maybe 4 or 5 times in total. Each time I have been there the service has been shall we say consistent and as expected- no problems.

[fuzzyone]

Thats strange nude and hj is the typical service here. Maybe they had a visit from the council and if that's the case they may limit the services. But I seriously hope that's not the case because I quite it here ecxept for the mouldy showers.

[Mr Crash and Burn]

Amy is a terrific girl, and the only time she hasnt fully nuded straight away with me was when she had the painters at home so the undies stayed on. Slarty's review is closer to mark, although I would rate her higher than what he possibly has from my visits to her.

As for wangan's review, you said you didnt click with her, so the problem may lie in your backyard not Amy's.

As for 429, it is one of the most consistent shops in Sydney, lots of really good girls working here. You should try Penny (Mon Tues) as she always delivers for me!!

[cato]

I agree with Mr C & B. Each time I have visited Amy, she has been a great performer and $120 for the hour always includes Nude HJ.

Not offering nude HJ couldn't be a local council problem as I don't think that encroaches into the brothel licensing domain.

It's a pity wangan had a bad experience, but on most accounts Amy always seems to provide a great service, so I'm not sure what went wrong with his visit?

Did you raise this issue with the mamasan? No point in just walking out unhappy after you've been duped out of a service which you paid for?

[Licker]

Not offering nude HJ couldn't be a local council problem as I don't think that encroaches into the brothel licensing domain.



You are right that
"Not offering nude HJ couldn't be a local council problem"
Then again
Offering nude HJ definitely could mean problems with the local council.

-----------

The current law regulating prostitution is found in the Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW), the Disorderly Houses Act 1943 (NSW) and, to a lesser extent, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).

If interested you can look up at the actual laws from http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/

Going through the legal process is typically too expensive for the councils.
They have other priorities in where to use their money, like providing services for the community.
And rightly so, I think!

But in theory, the following three Acts are the bases why the council might be interested, and take action if the situation turns problematic.
Problematic situation may arise for example from a SMH article mentioning a particular parlour (as it happened few weeks before Christmas).



prostitution is defined in s 3(1) of Summary Offences Act 1988:
‘prostitution’ includes acts of prostitution between persons of different sexes or of the same sex, and includes:
(a) sexual intercourse as defined in section 61H of the Crimes Act 1900 , and
(b) masturbation committed by one person on another,
for payment.


The Brothels Legislation Amendment Act 2007 amends two pieces of law which are then cross-referenced.


The Restricted Premises Act, 1943 (RPA Act), (formerly called the Disorderly Houses Amendment Act 1995), is amended at Schedule 2 as follows:

- the definition of a brothel includes premises advertised as providing sex services (prostitution)
- one amenity complaint may be sufficient to trigger an Order, except for places where only one sex worker works;
- a definition of related sex services is provided;
- an order to suspend or vary the operation of development consent (a DA) for up to 6 months is enabled; and
- a wider range of persons are able to make an amenity complaint.

The definition of a brothel now includes premises which have been expressly or implicitly advertised or represented as being used for the purposes of prostitution. Advertising may be signage, in or on the premises, newspapers, directories, the internet or other means.

A brothel closure order can be used to close legal premises , including those with Development Consent, where the premise has been the subject of an amenity-based complaint and where the council is satisfied the complaint is warranted.

Local councils may make an application for an order if one or more amenity complaints are made by persons who work, or use facilities in the vicinity, or their children use facilities in the vicinity

Related sex uses can be specifically disallowed after the Land and Environment Court has ordered a brothel to cease operating. Related sex uses is defined to mean sexual acts or sexual services in exchange for payment, or massage (other than therapeutic massage) or adult entertainment involving nudity, indecent acts or sexual activity in exchange for payment, or if provided with other goods or services. This law prevents a business ceasing the brothel use, but transforming into a related unauthorised use.




The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) is amended at Schedule1 as follows:

- powers are provided enabling brothel closure orders
- brothel closure orders are created, and are able to be served on a range of people, including the owner of the premises, operator or persons involved in managing a brothel
- the definition of a brothel is expanded to include premises advertised as providing sex services (prostitution)
- a new definition of related sex uses is introduced

These orders can be used against unauthorised or “illegal” sex services premises, but specifically are NOT to be used where there is only one sex worker.

[grant]

those who gave been following stories in smh about sex work will recognise the name eamon duff. he's written another article on the subject specifically mentioning 429 as being an unlicensed brothel. could be that the owners want to reduce their profile a little for now (or maybe for good)

http://www.dailylife.com.au/nsw/brothel-barons-expand-as-councils-fail-to-act-on-illegal-activities-20131130-2yi9m.html

[Licker]

those who gave been following stories in smh about sex work will recognise the name eamon duff. he's written another article on the subject specifically mentioning 429 as being an unlicensed brothel. could be that the owners want to reduce their profile a little for now (or maybe for good)

http://www.dailylife.com.au/nsw/brothel-barons-expand-as-councils-fail-to-act-on-illegal-activities-20131130-2yi9m.html

And that story about 429 was fed to Eamonn Duff by Chris Seage the owner of "Brothel Busters", who coincidentally is the only one who has lodged a complaint to the council about the place.
Why?
Is it because he's a concerned member of the community in Leichardt? No, he lives nowhere near.
Is it because he was paid to do so? Most probably so, by a licensed brothel nearby. (Probably = this is speculation. But that is what his "business" does)

Why has no-one else lodged a complaint?
No-one in the community is bothered by the place.
Even though it's technically against the current law, it's a victimless crime. Unless you're a brothel who's fighting for the customers.

In my view the whole law (even though amended in 2007) is still from the Victorian time.
And should be changed as soon as possible. Nobody gets hurt by getting a handy.


A victimless crime is a term used to refer to actions that have been ruled illegal but which are argued not to directly violate or threaten the rights of any other individual. It often involves consensual acts in which one or more persons commit a criminal offence in which no other person is involved. For example, in the United States, current victimless crimes include prostitution, gambling, and illicit drug use. Edwin Schur and Hugo Bedau state in their book Victimless Crimes: Two sides of a Controversy “some of these laws produce secondary crime, and all create new ‘criminals’ many of whom are otherwise law-abiding citizens and people in authority.”

[grant]

Well if I recall correctly, one of the arguments that Duff has made previously is that illegal brothels masquerading as massage joints are harming the business of actual massage joints (which I can see). Also, there's less money going to the taxman, but that's a loss I think few will complain about. I don't think allowing brothels to operate deals any appreciable amount of damage though.

I wouldn't agree that no-one would be bothered by the place. It might not be 429 specifically, but even today people are irked by the idea of sex being a trade and an industry. If people weren't bothered by it, articles like this wouldn't be written (I mean come on, "brothel baron" and any mention of online forums reviewing experiences with sex workers is too delicious for a news editor to pass up). People love having their prejudices reinforced. People relish the idea of others sharing in their outrage because it confirms that their feelings were right all along. Very little gets these people off than their 2 minutes of sputtering anger at the breakfast table (possibly because they're not so open to visiting a brothel).

[Licker]

People love having their prejudices reinforced. People relish the idea of others sharing in their outrage because it confirms that their feelings were right all along. Very little gets these people off than their 2 minutes of sputtering anger at the breakfast table (possibly because they're not so open to visiting a brothel).

Yes they do!

Would you agree though, that to most of these people it does not really matter whether a place is a licensed brothel or an "illegal" one?
It's the concept of prostitution itself that bothers them.