Do not complain to her privately before the 14-day review period is over. She will know that her review will be negative and may write you a bad review in retaliation.
Once your review is posted, she can reply publicly but there is no further “back-and-forth” publicly, There is only one comment allowed on a review.
As others have said, she is not a “5-star sitter” no matter how amazing her pet care was - and it wasn’t amazing given the dog’s weight gain and being left in the care of her hook-ups. If you think she was 5 stars in some areas you can mark those individual categories highly, but please giver her 3 stars or less overall. Future HOs need to know her behavior. I’d give one or 2 stars overall.
@Cuttlefish hilarious!! And thank you! Wow, I would never in a million years have known that one, never had the need or inclination for Tinder - although
Don’t worry! My mind was boggling as to how exactly ‘hook-up culture energy’ might be identified simply from seeing someone arrive on a doorbell camera. Unless they’d wandered up the drive in a state of undress I think I’d just assume they’d popped round for a nice cup of tea!
@Timshazz woman, gimme a break, I’ve been off the market for a long time! Aka not looking! @temba I’m usually pretty much up with all this stuff but I think you might be right! @Becca doesn’t sound like tea was what they were enjoying @botvot sounds like it could have been a darn good cup of tea!
Sorry but I’m confused as to how you ‘know’ that the sitter’s short-term visitors = “hook-up energy.” Did you see him/her/they making out with different people on the Ring camera or something? Or do you have cameras inside?!
The longer term friend staying is a violation of trust, ASSUMING you made it clear that guests were not an option. (FWIW, I have had a few HOs explicitly say it was OK. Otherwise I’d assume it’s not.) And a friend staying nearly the entire sit seems very off/wrong especially if you brought up the guest issue.
General comment about Tinder: It may have begun as a ‘hook up’ app but evolved pretty quickly to be just like any other dating/relationship app. I joke that we (women) ‘ruined’ it.
Unless I missed something, I don’t see any evidence for the OP’s assumptions about the sitter’s alleged “swipe right” activities.
I may be scarred from having had a nasty, misogynistic neighbor (who sat on the sidewalk spying on people all daynight) who’d tell all and sundry, “Katie has a LOT of male visitors.” Yeah, let’s see…he’d seen my boyfriend, best friend, brother, and dad visit me at various times. AH. That’s the kind of malicious gossip that could get a woman harmed.
Yes, that’s kind of my point! And exactly why I’ve suggested in my original reply (5th post down) that when the homeowner reviews the sitter, anything too specific regarding guests could come across as a bit of an assumption and detract from the main point of their review.
Hi thank you for these points. My original post was denied by THS for being too specific so I made it more general, causing more questions.
We have a condo with building cameras & only a Ring Camera Doorbell, absolutely no cameras in the home. We also remove our Google Nest devices when we have sitters.
There were enough “tells” of the nature of the 3 individual visits prior to the guest that stayed for 7 days. Not one of the 4 guests were family members (hopefully ). I wasn’t monitoring our sitter in real time, only that we received a snapshot image notification of 2 people entering our home. From there, I became curious and looked at the history on our Ring app.
Folks are making assumptions regarding genders of all parties involved. (For me, this is a behavior issue, not a gender issue.) I did use the “swipe right” verbiage for my last two sitters who were both younger than previous sitters (admittedly I was keeping it light) but I will revise to a more explicit statement regarding guests moving forward.
I’m torn about guests. If a sitter wants to have a friend or 2 over, that they know, not that they’re just meeting for the first time, I’m ok with that. My dog won’t pick up “this is a stranger” from familiar energy. Plus I just don’t want strangers in my home. If I say “no guests” I worry about a sitter staying out with friends longer than intended, leaving our girl alone for too long. If I have to choose, after this experience, I prefer no guests. The focus and care paid to our dog is #1.
We live in a big city and many of our sitters have had friends/family nearby that have visited after they checked in with me. We are pretty easy-going people typically. Context is everything if we continue to allow guests moving forward.
(I number my paragraphs to keep my own thoughts straight, pls don’t take offense.)
I think it’s fine, and not unusual, to state “no guests please” in your listing. On a call you can get a sense for them and then say that if they have a known friend stop by, or come over for a meal, that’s alright.
In my opinion, if you allow guests, it’s absolutely non of your business what the sitter does with them. If you’re not comfortable with that, then either agree in advance on no guests or agree on a list of people who are allowed in the house beforehand. If you keep the rules ambiguous (like how well did the sitter know a person), it’s not really fair to give a lower score for a sitter that didn’t follow them in a way that pleases you.
Same goes to the “limit” table food. The dog gaining 2 lbs is not really a sign of the sitter breaking the rules.
Speculating, but not necessarily. What the homeowner came home to is a dog with a pretty significant weight gain and broken plate. Frankly, given that a weight gain like that could lead to issues and is really bad, that alone would be reason to deduct for pet care, but I could imagine other pet owners not really noticing or deciding it could’ve happened with anyone, blaming themselves for insufficient feeding instructions, etc and still giving the sitter a five star rating. We’ve all been trained by the review norms to be generous and not petty. Some of that came from fear of retaliation, but some just came because those were the norms. HOs might also fear that if they reviewed harshly – say for a weight gain – other sitters might not want to sit for them.
The kicker here really was that the external cameras allowed the homeowner to see what was going on, not only the hook up events, but the houseguest who took over sitting duties and wasn’t vetted. The sitter did in fact put the dog in a very precarious position – out with someone not vetted or accepted by the owner. The sitter did in fact put the home in a precarious situation – strangers having access. I’m guessing other HOs either didn’t have cameras, or nosy neighbors, or turned off live feeds and didn’t check.
We are all on both sides trusting strangers not to lie to us. Reviews are one tool we have, but they are never going to be perfect.
It’s a reference to Tinder the dating app. Swipe right means you’re ready to hook up, left means no thanks. 
Wow, I would never in a million years have known that one, never had the need or inclination for Tinder - although 
). I wasn’t monitoring our sitter in real time, only that we received a snapshot image notification of 2 people entering our home. From there, I became curious and looked at the history on our Ring app.