@AndyAysegul there have been too many home owners on ‘vacation’ who check in regularly to see the cameras and then respond accordingly if they see something they don’t like. We agree with @pietkuip it’s creepy! AND most cameras have microphones where home owners can ‘drop in’ and listen anytime. Why risk it? Our BIGGEST pet peeve is home owners telling us they have indoor cameras but can disable them. Yeah, okay, sure…have a camera in our ‘hotel’ where you can turn it on or off from your phone and can listen in wherever you feel like it…but “Don’t worry, we don’t use them and they are disabled while we are gone.”
I have never experienced what you have described, home owners with cameras that check in regularly. Perhaps this is more common in the US than in the UK. Also, it may be that because I send frequent updates to owners about their dogs, often with photos or video clips, plus share walking routes using Map My Walk, they don’t need feel the need to check up.
I also wonder if because I’m a non-working nomad the HOs don’t think their dogs will be competing for my time. Just a thought.
I think the habit of checking up cameras has more to do with the HO’s personality than the sitter’s profile or attitude. Of course, an owner would be more inclined to check if they saw red flags but even if everything goes well, we would not necessarily know if we are being watched.
I agree to a certain extent that the overuse of external security cameras to micromanage a sitter is probably a reflection of the HO’s personality. But, we don’t know why they behave in such a way, perhaps they’ve had bad experiences with sitters and their homes, or pets. Or maybe that have been victims of a break in or burglary and as a consequence have high levels of anxiety.
I like the term used earlier in this thread, micromanaging and I think that’s often much more appropriate than spying where sitters and HO’s are involved. The latter suggests covert or clandestine use for nefarious purposes.
I have just used the term “watching”. I do not want to use an evaluative term. Different people will watch their camera footage for different reasons. Some of them, totally understandable. Even just to see how their pets are enjoying the garden.
As a sitter, all I need to know is where the cameras are; if I feel we are a good match and trust the owners, I will go ahead with my application. Still, I will expect some level of watching and will dress and behave accordingly, not exactly the same as I do in the privacy of my home.
Indeed. But why would you need such documentation? We’re all conscientious pet-sitters who do our very best for the animals in our care. To my mind, when I sign up for a sit, that’s a given. Why would you need Proof?
Or do we now live in a world where our backsides must be covered at all times, in all places and in all postures?
If someone has a problem with cameras, you better question what it is that they don’t want you to see. Quit blindly trusting strangers with your pets, theres too many things that have been caught by camera that wouldn’t of otherwise been known than to think they don’t serve a purpose. If you are in someone elses house, you shouldn’t expect complete privacy. Everywhere you go in public your on camera.
You should expect a home without internal cameras on as it would otherwise be breach of the THS terms. If someone needs to have internal cameras on, they should use other options than THS. For instance a paid petsitting service.
We’d have a problem with privacy, nakedness, personal space, trust and the list goes on. You’ve just entrusted those “strangers” to also look after your home, security and possessions as well as your pets @TravelAgentMelissa so if you don’t trust them with all that then THS is not for you. Internal cameras are against the rules as @Garfield says. Everywhere in Turkey is far from “on camera”, maybe in suburban UK or USA but not in villages & rural spots. #camerachaos
I would hope there’s nothing ‘blind’ about it; responsible pet parents will thoroughly read profiles and reviews, look at pics of pets previously cared for, have a chat and possibly invite sitters to stay over the night before departure. If, after all that, you feel you need to check up on your sitters via cameras, I’d suggest THS possibly isn’t the place for you, and paid pet care might be the better option. An element of trust is imperative to good sits.
It turns out this post has raised a problem with regard to security cameras and I can understand why. China, USA, Germany and UK are the countries with the most cameras.
In 2005, the Turkish government launched a program called the Urban Security Management System (known by the acronym MOBESE), a network of CCTV cameras installed around Istanbul to monitor crime. MOBESE was soon expanded to cities all over Turkey, where its cameras remain a conspicuous piece of urban jewelry.
Istanbul for example ranks 5th in the world in terms of security cameras with over 7 (7.15) CCTV cameras per 1000 people is Istanbul. The largest city in Turkey used to be the country’s hub and epicentre back when it was called Constaninaple, now it is a tourist hotspot and can suffer from higher crime rates. Source: CCTV Cameras by Countries & Cities (2023 Guide) - Upcoming Security
I guess it depends on where you live in Turkey but we are in a rural area with government security CCTV cameras in several locations near us and many properties have security cameras too. We are not in a particularly high crime area either.
But I guess this post is mainly concerned about people’s homes having security cameras. There is nothing that can be done about state CCTV systems but owners can take down or turn off their cameras to make a sitter more comfortable. Most of the home security cameras glow red at night when they are using infra red so that can help you to ascertain whether or not they are switched on or off.
Haven’t heard of the programme (although we do sit in Istanbul & have just returned from there yesterday to the SW Turkish Coast). The only cameras that we’ve come across have effectively been internal cat cams for when the owners are out & then they’ve been unplugged during sits. Not even ring door bells so far. Maybe we’ve been unusually lucky, am not sure but that’s over 12 or so different Turkish locations as a small poll. #puzzling
I don’t mind a Ring doorbell or similar. Object to other cameras, and internal ones are illegal. I always ask the question when we have the video call beforehand. Being monitored is seriously creepy. I won’t tolerate it. And cameras indoors are against THS T&Cs. There’s a clue in the word “trusted”.
Well I know plenty of homes that do not have security cameras too so I understand. I have noticed in Istanbul they often try to tuck the CCTV cameras away discreetly except of course the original big globe looking ones with several cameras on them. I think this is a sign of the times though. Once one Belediye gets the idea the others follow in varying degrees depending on what region you are in.
I also think a lot of it recently is due to the economy situation and rising petty theft as people start to get paranoid - another reason why household security camera sales have soared in Turkey over the last couple of years. My friend’s computer shop now fits more cameras than he fixes computers. Even our taxi drivers are starting to fit internal cameras in their cabs due to difficult customers. A sign of the times I guess.
As you will know Turkey is always full of surprises. It’s probably why we like it so much
No, not a problem. We just unplug interior ones. It’s not because we are doing anything illegal but my husband likes to wander about naked in the morning and I wouldn’t inflict that video on anyone.
@TravelAgentMelissa. The THS review system; member profiles; and pre-sit due diligence should provide trust. We are experienced housesitters. Nothing to hide. But I take issue with needless privacy invasion and wholeheartedly support THS policy on cameras and recording devices.
During our housesitting, we have been fortunate to manage a significant number of high value properties. Trust has never been identified as an issue.
It’s a slippery slope from non-cash fair trade to a commercial relationship. If a Pet Parent seeks pet care or property management services that exceed THS policies then they should hire a paid professional.
THS terms say no internal cameras. And in some jurisdictions it’s illegal to video someone without permission, even if you own the place. Like depending on what someone can prove and what you video, they can press charges and/or sue you for financial damages. And if you happen to film a minor undressed, like changing clothes, you could be charged with child pornography.
In the U.S., if you’re convicted of such, you would go on a s#x offender registry, which the public can see. S#x offenders also can be barred from living or working near schools and other places frequented by kids. And some businesses will fire / not hire you.
And even it weren’t against THS terms or against the law, watching people secretly is just creepy.
I just happened to look at a sit recently in a city I enjoy visiting. It didn’t say they were actively violating the terms with inside cameras, but there was a lot in the wording – something about the house being “at least” as orderly when they arrive home and that they would explain the security system after confirming the sit. I’ll wait for something else to come along.
agree with @pietkuip it’s creepy! AND most cameras have microphones where home owners can ‘drop in’ and listen anytime. Why risk it? Our BIGGEST pet peeve is home owners telling us they have indoor cameras but can disable them. Yeah, okay, sure…have a camera in our ‘hotel’ where you can turn it on or off from your phone and can listen in wherever you feel like it…but “Don’t worry, we don’t use them and they are disabled while we are gone.”
