Which is better: a candy shop or a sex shop?

The popular online sex shop Candy Kingdom has had a run of bad publicity recently, with customers reporting being left frustrated and even angry after they were unable to access the store, while others are still unable to get in touch with a customer after trying.

The website, which has been popular with both straight men and women, has been plagued by various complaints since its launch last year, but recently, the company has had to put up a new “customer service” page to reassure customers that the site is not for sale.

The new page states: “This is not Candy Kingdom.

Candy Kingdom is not an escort agency or a brothel.

We do not allow the sale of sex, but we can provide services.

We are not responsible for anyone who decides to buy our product, or for their purchase.”

The new information also states that customers are not required to be a registered sex offender to visit the site.

Some customers have also reported having to cancel their orders after having their orders refunded.

The site has also been forced to change its name from “candy shop” to “sex shop”, as it had become “too offensive” for some customers.

The controversial sex shop has been one of the hottest sellers on the popular gay escort market.

In September, Candy Kingdom was accused of being a brothels “carnival” and a sex-trafficking ring by the U.K.’s Independent Police Complaints Commission.

The agency found that the “caviar” site was “a venue for the exploitation of vulnerable women and girls,” as well as for “the provision of a sexual service.”

The complaint was issued after a complaint about a customer who had paid for sex, and after Candy Kingdom had refused to take down the “adult” content that they were hosting on the site, which included videos of women having sex and photos of naked women.

The company was also accused of selling “adult material,” including videos of bondage, sadomasochism, and other sexually explicit content, that was “clearly offensive” to children.

In response to the allegations, Candy King said they “remain committed to providing a safe and enjoyable shopping experience for our customers.”

The company also said in a statement that “we will continue to review our customer service policies and practices, and continue to provide a safe environment for our guests.”

In February, a report by The Daily Mail revealed that the website had “an estimated 1.6 million visitors a day,” with the majority of the visitors coming from Britain, where the company operates.

In the report, The Mail said that the average customer spends around £4.50 on a visit to Candy Kingdom, and that it also claimed that “over 80 percent of customers have never visited a porn site before.”

In August, it was reported that the company was under investigation by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) after a series of complaints.

According to the report by the watchdog, “calls from the public were made by concerned customers regarding the use of offensive language, including homophobic slurs and abuse, and in some cases, offensive content.”

The investigation into Candy Kingdom also found that it had failed to adequately investigate complaints and take down inappropriate content.

The IPCA said that while they “may be aware of potential issues and have taken some measures to address some of these concerns,” “we do not condone the use or sale of child pornography, child pornography-related images and videos, and child abuse.”

The report said that it would “take action if appropriate” to make further recommendations to the online shopping company.

Earlier this year, Candy Kongas website was banned in the UK after a group of angry customers began a petition calling for the company to be taken down, with the petition receiving over 8,000 signatures.

The petition, called Stop The Candy Kingdom From Killing Your Fantasy Life, claimed that the sex shop is “a brothel, not a sex store,” and that the product “is meant to be consumed in a sexually-explicit environment.”

According to a statement from the company, the website was shut down “because of the unacceptable nature of the material on the website.”