Author Topic: Tara  (Read 205977 times)

Offline whskers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
Re: Tara
« Reply #510 on: February 22, 2020, 04:11:21 AM »
I agree she did sound arrogant. I don’t remember my reading that much but I was pretty sure out of that 20-30 min reading, she talk about her opinion for maybe 10 mins. She’s so wrong.

Offline TeaAndCookies

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Tara
« Reply #511 on: February 22, 2020, 04:25:53 PM »
I read with her three times in total. First time she nailed it with a past POI. Second time, she got more negative with another POI but I thought she was just having a bad day. Third time was just totally wrong. I felt like I was causing her inconvenience even though I’m paying a lot for a reading. She also gave me book recommendations. I never back called after that.

Offline HornetKick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1956
Re: Tara
« Reply #512 on: February 22, 2020, 11:24:30 PM »
Oh no...not the dreaded book recommendations. I've gotten tons of those and blow the reading off afterward.

Offline TeaAndCookies

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Tara
« Reply #513 on: February 24, 2020, 05:41:25 PM »
Hornet, I agree. I felt like she got more negative, more judgemental, and spent more time giving advice. It wasn't worth $8.50/min of hard earned money. I have spent too much money on that frigging site to feel judged and talked down to. Just venting...

Offline Heather

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
Re: Tara
« Reply #514 on: February 28, 2020, 12:05:31 AM »
Once she gets to know a situation, the judgment starts. She can be extremely accurate in the most uncanny way, but that doesn’t mean her predictions pan out because a lot of times I’ve found that they don’t. She recommended books to me too in addition to going on and on about this planet crossing with that sign and that’s not what I’m calling about!

I’ll never forget the time she went on and on about someone’s allergies. 7 minutes and $50 later to only learn that someone has allergies and probably a cold.

taurusgirl

  • Guest
Re: Tara
« Reply #515 on: February 28, 2020, 12:07:39 AM »
Right now it was only first contact. But everyone says we will get married and get back.  So I’m just waiting. Isabella said she will message me again to start things slow sometime next week. Let’s see.


Did it happen?

Offline MikeNY

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 121
Re: Tara
« Reply #516 on: February 28, 2020, 03:26:53 PM »
So the first contact happened but I think it was luck. Because the second contact never did happen. Also, she blocked me again.  She blocked me for 4 months and just to see how I am. Then she blocks me again. I think they are all full of shit

Offline Smiley1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Tara
« Reply #517 on: March 09, 2020, 09:47:47 AM »
Any
Tara updates?

Offline Smiley1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Tara
« Reply #518 on: March 12, 2020, 11:13:51 PM »
Here’s a first.  Just read with Tara again.  She’d said contact in March so just had a quick follow up.  She said not looking good. Not going to be a romance again and July earliest for contact.

I called her on it. Her response was she’s picking up bad vibes because of the pandemic and it may be an off reading.  Wtf???

Offline whskers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
Re: Tara
« Reply #519 on: March 16, 2020, 01:54:07 PM »
I just remembered this, Tara described this guy coming to my life that year I read with her in 2017. That never happened either. I did not have any other relationship, even dates, during that year. The next relationship I had in the mid of the following year was nothing like she described. She’s so arrogant and waste your money on her opinions.

Offline calibabe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
Re: Tara
« Reply #520 on: March 16, 2020, 10:50:07 PM »
Here’s a first.  Just read with Tara again.  She’d said contact in March so just had a quick follow up.  She said not looking good. Not going to be a romance again and July earliest for contact.

I called her on it. Her response was she’s picking up bad vibes because of the pandemic and it may be an off reading.  Wtf???


LMAO what a cop out and waste of money!

Offline PurpleRain

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
Re: Tara
« Reply #521 on: March 16, 2020, 10:59:59 PM »
😂😂😂 Oh really? Call CP and ask for a refund since Corona is affecting her guides. Smh

Here’s a first.  Just read with Tara again.  She’d said contact in March so just had a quick follow up.  She said not looking good. Not going to be a romance again and July earliest for contact.

I called her on it. Her response was she’s picking up bad vibes because of the pandemic and it may be an off reading.  Wtf???

Offline spiritualbinger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
Re: Tara
« Reply #522 on: March 17, 2020, 01:52:35 AM »
She was a TOTAL flop for me. She got one prediction correct re: contact and a meeting, but other than that 2 other readings and final outcome were al fairytales and totally bogus.

Offline Ani9090

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Tara
« Reply #523 on: March 19, 2020, 04:26:03 AM »
I agree she was so off for me, nothing came true and I wanted her to be right but nopeeeep

Offline simsim

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
Re: Tara
« Reply #524 on: July 02, 2020, 04:59:04 PM »
Queshtion to everyone who remembers their very first reading with Tara;

What she accurate for you when you first read with her the very first time?
Did the predictions of her first reading came to pass for you?


I’m asking because the more you talk to a psychic the less accurate they get and with Tara’s case more judgmental based on the stuff I read.

So if you remember your first reading. Plz answer the queshtions!

Based on my first reading back in oct 2019, she was spot on about what POI wanted and intentions. Other the weeks POI admitted it. Spoke to her again last week (new account) she doesn’t remember me, and told me it’s a temp pause and POI will be back.... I honestly can’t see it realistically but I’m hopeful. She was accurate again about what POI is dealing with. Extremely accurate from what I can tell