My husband and I have been house sitting through TrustedHousesitters for about 1.5 years now, and while we’ve had some really wonderful experiences, we’ve also encountered some tough ones that made us reflect more deeply on the nature of this exchange.
We understand that THS is built on a mutual exchange—free pet care in return for free accommodation. When that balance works, it’s amazing. But there have been several instances where the expectations placed on us as sitters have felt disproportionate, to the point where it feels like homeowners are taking advantage of the arrangement.
Sometimes it’s the level of care required—like dogs that need specialized, round-the-clock attention or homes that are in poor condition. In one case, we were told a dog had the occasional accident, which we were okay with, only to find that she never went outside and was having accidents multiple times a day, every single day. We spent 2.5 weeks cleaning up after her, four or more times daily, on top of living in a very dirty house that wasn’t at all as presented in the listing.
What makes situations like this extra difficult is that we’re expected to stick it out and ensure the homeowner is satisfied, because our future as sitters (and the reviews we receive) depend on that. It feels like the power dynamic favors the homeowner, and it leaves little recourse for sitters who feel misled.
We absolutely support the idea of exchange-based sitting, and we know we always have the right to decline a sit. But we’d really love to see THS take a more active role in helping homeowners assess when their level of care or the condition of their home might warrant offering a daily stipend. If someone had to pay for the care they expect, it could cost them hundreds—so even a modest daily amount would still be a huge deal for them and could make the difference between sitters feeling taken advantage of or truly valued.
At the very least, a stronger push for honest and clear listings would go a long way. Transparency builds trust—and that’s something everyone in this community benefits from.
We’d love to hear if others have experienced something similar, and if you think this kind of change would help keep the exchange fair and sustainable for both sides.
It’s interesting that you write of being ‘misled’ rather than you not reading any red flags correctly. Being misled sounds like deception or misdirection by the HO, which THS can’t really protect sitters from…. and can only be rooted out by the initial sitter writing an honest review. It’s a very unfortunate but possibly rare occurrence? How many HOs get more than 1 or 2 sitters if they’re being dishonest….unless sitters aren’t being honest about their experience and dropping others in it.
It’s a conundrum. We’ve now completed 6 sits ranging from OMG I’m in a dream to OMG I’m in a nightmare….all were 5* sits on the surface but ranged from a very relaxing chilled time to almost like a full time job! I’m trying to learn how to spot the better end of this complex continuum….
Although I agree with you that I read a lot of profiles where I think it is not a fair exchange and even had the unfortunate experience of experiencing one myself, I don’t think there should be exchange of money. That would completely change this business model and open up a whole new can of worms for PP, sitters and the company. As long as they keep getting sitters and sitters give them good reviews they will stay on the platform. I know I was guilty of giving one PP a more favorable review than they should have received. I now advocate for myself and others to be honest in reviews. Just stay away from the ones you don’t think are fair exchanges. If you happen upon one give an honest review. If they can’t get sitters they will leave the platform. There are companies that are for paid sitters and you could always join one of those. I do think that PP on here who have more demanding pets, plants, etc, would be nice if they left a gift card to the grocery store, a nice restaurant or some kind of thank you.
Whilst I agree with your sentiments I believe the review system, as it stands, is the best mechanism to ensure accuracy of listings as everyone’s perceptions (of their homes or pets) are subjective.
What needs to be reinforced by THS is that both HOs and Sitters need to be honest in their reviews. Sitters need to be protecting the interests of future sitters and HOs likewise the interest of future HOs. Along the way hopefully honest reviews will encourage sitters and HOs to modify their behaviour and or listing.
Edit to add that both HOs and sitters need to learn how to do due diligence, read between the lines and not compromise their position just to fill gaps and or see a new region.
Since THS don’t inspect the homes that are listed , the only way to ensure that listings are accurate is for sitters to leave honest and accurate reviews for future sitters to read.
Yes, agree wholeheartedly with you. Often when sitters (and hosts) post about sits gone wrong, there appear to have been red flags that should’ve headed them off in the first place. And in various cases, many of us have seen listings that sound off and yet multiple sitters have applied anyway.
Seems like some sitters (and hosts) take needless risks / make bad decisions / lack discernment or the ability to spot trouble ahead of time. To me, if anyone is repeatedly “misled,” they should closely review how they’re choosing sits (or sitters) and tighten up.
Personally, I have zero interest in a stipend. If any sits are onerous enough to merit that, I’d want to avoid them, period. To me, such sits don’t belong on THS, because that’s not in the spirit of the business model. There are other platforms or avenues for paid sitting.
BTW, in my sitter profile, I include a friendly heads up that THS dealbreakers include a lack of transparency about a pet’s health, internal video cameras, third-parties during the sit and such. And I always have a backup plan for sits I accept. If anyone misleads me (hasn’t happened yet), I’m prepared to quit a sit, should it come to that. I won’t let myself be trapped or stranded by terrible / deceptive hosts. To me, that’s part of self-care and agency.
I agree. It could be, as suggested by @Marion in another thread,
But I can’t support this proposal
There are other paid petsitting options. If nobody applied for such sits or just left if the conditions are misrepresented by the owners, these listings would soon disappear from THS.
I completely agree. All of this is a learning process. In my initial sits, I accepted some things that I probably shouldn’t have, but the answer was not to get paid - the answer was to leave an honest review and then learn from my mistakes in the future so as not to repeat them.
If THS started having a paid model, I would just stop using it. There are plenty of services like that already. The beauty of this is in “fair exchange”. I’ve seen plenty of listings where the owners asked for ridiculous things, and then they freak out when they don’t get any applicants. Or, they sprung a surprise on the sitters - and the sitters leave honest reviews, so the owners don’t get future sitters (at least not sitters that are doing their due diligence) It’s a bit of a self-correcting system, and to @Maggie8k 's point, I never accept a sit that I can’t walk away from. Knowing that I can leave within 24 hours if the owners were not upfront is essential.
No sitter HAS to stay in a very dirty house or clean up multiple accidents when the probability of that was not disclosed. They can raise a dispute with member services, give 24 hours’ notice, and get the heck out of there. It works both ways. I sat for homeowners who told me a horror story from one of their early sitters; they provided evidence to member services of how unsuitable he was, the sitter was required to leave, and THS stepped in and found a paid sitter to cover the remaining time (they had the insurance).
Maybe we need to hear more matter-of-fact stories about when situations like this occurred. I think when people here calm, non-emotional, true stories of how bad sits or bad sitters were effectively dealt with, it will give them the confidence to walk away should it happen to them.
I don’t really feel THS could successfully implement stipends without transitioning to a full-on paid model, which would significantly change the nature of the service.
I’ve only been on the site a short while, but I’ve spent a lot of time looking at available sits. At times I’m a bit incredulous at the expectations some HO’s list. Why tell me about all the activities within a couple hours of your home if you also require that your pet not be left alone for more than 2h – or the listed feeding/exercise schedule makes it clear the sitter will not be leaving the house for more than a hurried dash to the store for supplies? HO wants a sitter to mow & weed their 2 acre lawn & maintain their pool on a 1-week sit? In my mind, those are paid jobs, and there are other sites out there who fill that niche. What I know for sure is that I won’t be applying. I will almost always go the extra mile to help out a HO if I feel things are reciprocal & it’s appreciated, but no one likes to feel taken advantage of.
We should always look for red flags and listen to our gut when reading/applying for sits. That said, sometimes misunderstandings can happen – and sometimes we can miss the up-front flags. I’ve been lucky that all my sits have been great, but I’m sure there’s one out there that’s going to be less than ideal. those are few and far-between.
What I do worry about sometimes is safety, as I’m a female sitter who often travels alone. This is one reason I would like to see THS amend their model to include background checks of HOs, at least in the US & other countries where it’s allowed. While this wouldn’t necessarily address the OP’s specific issue, it might reduce some listings that seem a bit ad hoc, or just thrown up there hoping for free labor without any reciprocal requirements or responsibilities.
I kinda feel like something like this happened during our last house sit.
Wonderful hosts, gorgeous home, a kitty with an undisclosed UTI.
What was said to be “an accident a month ago” turned out into daily cleaning, me calling my own vet for advice, and supplementing with things that weren’t medicating the symptoms. I was not mad at any of those but I felt uncomfortable that I seemed more concerned about their cat’s health than they were. I actually don’t think the cat has gone to the vet at all post sit (I hope I’m wrong… untreated uti’s are lethal for cats long term.)
those are few and far-between.