Thank you for saying this. I often wonder why some sitters don’t want their comings and going ‘watched’. Then we see posts about HO saying Sitters did not care for their pets appropriately.
Interior cameras are a clear no.
But if I were a responsible sitter - I would have no objections to exterior cameras as they would prove the care given to the pets.
I know one or two respondents here have also stated they leave pets alone overnight and don’t tell the HO because ‘dogs sleep whether we are there or not’. So, I know why those posters think exterior cameras are creepy.
I don’t like external cameras. They are intrusive, and make me very anxious. It’s nothing to do with my trustworthiness or capabilities, and everything to do with my own privacy. If an owner doesn’t trust that a sitter will undertake the caring tasks agreed, then they shouldn’t utilise their services. And perhaps also shouldn’t use TRUSTED House Sitters.
I’m currently on a sit where one of the external cameras points at the door to such a degree that I can be seen working/living my daily life in the window. I only found this out after the owners left. I was extremely hesitant about taking this sit, but decided to give it a go, mainly because it’s close to a friend I haven’t seen in decades and thought it would be lovely for us to catch up at long last. I dearly wish I hadn’t.
I’m so tired of people trying to justify invasions of privacy. Cameras should be banned.
That’s not permitted on THS so you can cover it / ask owners to disconnect it or change the position so that it no longer monitors the inside of the home . Contact THS Urgent Support Line 24/7 phone number for support .
“ What we allow
Devices fitted to the exterior of a property or doorbell that monitor security of the outside areas such as the porch, driveway and garden.
What we don’t allow
Any active devices monitoring the interior of a property during a sit.”
So an outside camera positioned to monitor the interior of the property is not permitted to be active during a THS sit .
Or does that imply that anyone who dislikes cameras is automatically not a responsible sitter? I think that’s quite a stretch. Folks, please understand what Trusted Housesitters is all about. If you don’t like it, then PAY for the privilege of pestering people with your cameras and demands.
I don’t mind external cameras, but I get why some people dislike cameras of any sort, for privacy reasons. And to imply that people are untrustworthy just because they dislike cameras is unreasonable. Sounds like someone who’s automatically distrustful.
Even if they’ve run into problems before, those are their trust issues — they’re automatically considering everyone else potentially untrustworthy, which already puts anyone else on a back foot with them. If so, why not just sit for people without such distrust?
I would interpretate that to mean they had alarms that needed to be set when the house was empty.
It just shows how individuals see different meanings in the same sentence
Late to this game but I will say, as a person who is maniacal about their privacy, that I do appreciate the external cameras for certain, as long as they’re not facing INTO the house, which I’ve had on one of my sits, and I really liked that homeowner, she wasn’t uptight or weird, I can’t say why the camera was that way as I never mentioned it to her I just closed the curtains. Secretly having nannycams on the inside of the house is just being disrespectful and paranoid, if you can’t trust people you shouldn’t be using this site and instead pay a local sitter to look after things for you.
I wasn’t necessarily interpretting it as inside cameras, I’m just not a fan of complicated alarms. I’ve sat at least two US sits where we were told it was fine not to have the alarm on if we left the house for a few hours or were in it. (These were in very low crime areas btw.) My moving on was based as much on the phrasing around cleaning as on the security system. Just sounded like too much work!
