There is also a sting. These men have been set up by their wives, who hire women to test their husbands' fidelity.

Last week, a British media report said that honey trapping was a growing trend in Britain, with more private investigators there using sexy women as bait to test the faithfulness of their clients' spouses.

It is happening in Singapore too.

When The Sunday Times rang up 10 private investigator (PI) firms here last week, four readily offered the honey-trapper service.

One even claimed that its honey trappers would 'go all the way'. But the others drew the line at physical intimacy.

Lawyers and the six firms that did not touch such jobs said that although 'entrapment' of this sort is not illegal, it raises ethical questions.

And while it is more usual for women to be hired so that wives can entrap their husbands, some husbands will 'test' their wives' fidelity, said one PI. In such cases, handsome men are used as bait.

In any case, honey trapping does not come cheap.

The four firms quoted fees of $5,000 to $18,000 for a month's work. These figures can be as much as three times more than those for regular surveillance on an errant spouse.

One firm justified its fee by claiming that its honey trappers were 'trained professionals'.

Two firms said that their own women PIs would play the honey trapper role, but the other two said they would engage 'social escorts or foreigners' who fit the bill.

One PI, whose quoted fee was $10,000, gave the assurance that he would get a 'head-turner'. He said: 'My female PIs, good figure, nice boobs.'

The PI who quoted an $18,000 fee said his staff would first do a background check on the spouse being trapped. The target would be tailed to his hangouts in order to establish the type of woman he was attracted to. The firm would then pick the right female PI for the job.

He added: 'I have a range of PIs to choose from, different ages and all races.'

There are other expenses that add to the fee. Apart from the honey trapper, another PI is needed to take pictures or video recordings. In some cases, more than one trapper may be needed in reserve if the first fails to entice the target.

All the honey trappers seem to have the same modus operandi: They typically set up a 'chance meeting' in pubs, MRT stations or in the area where the target works.

A typical scenario: She bumps into him, asks to borrow his cellphone or simply drops a file. A 'friendship' may result.

Or, more directly, she drops him a flirtatious message or phone call. She may claim that she got his number from a friend.

If an exchange of flirtatious calls and messages follows, she will ask for a meeting.

'Basically, we're setting a trap for these men to bite,' said one PI. 'And 90 per cent of the time, they will.'

Several PIs find such entrapment distasteful.

Veteran PI Lionel De Souza, a former police officer, said he had turned down jobs from wives seeking honey-trapper services. 'They know their husbands are cheating and they want to get evidence in case of a divorce,' he said.

But he felt that good detective work was enough to uncover such evidence.

Retired PI Harmon Singh suggested one other motive for women resorting to honey trapping: Some want to find out if their husbands will be faithful enough to resist temptation.

'They suspect their husband flirts around, but they just want to confirm if he will succumb,' said Mr Singh, whose firm provided honey-trapping services.

Another PI, who disapproves of entrapment, said some clients want proof of cheating to get out of a marriage. Mr Jegan S.M., director of Kokusai Security, said: 'They just want to get rid of their partners fast.'

Some husbands, suspicious of their wives' fidelity, have engaged male honey trappers. One PI said that male honey trappers were usually the 'handsome gigolo or party boy types'.

Most lawyers said entrapment was unethical.

Senior lawyer Amolat Singh said: 'But though morally reprehensible, it is not unlawful.'

Family lawyer Foo Siew Fong added that the Family Court, where divorce hearings are usually held, was concerned with whether adultery had been committed and not whether a trapper had been used.

Kokusai Security's Jegan S.M. said PI firms which provide honey-trapper services were tarnishing the reputations of other PIs.

'It's not fair to the target,' he said. 'What we need is the truth, not setting him up.'

One firm which provides the service said it would not allow the evidence obtained to be used in court. 'It's only for spouses to know if their partners will be faithful,' the PI said.

mavistoh@sph.com.sg

Do you think it is right to use a honey trapper to bait a cheating spouse?

Send your comments to suntimes@sph.com.sg