I don’t want to read the hundreds of posts on the changes. I just want to know how I can be blocked of the site that I have paid for if I don’t want to accept the new terms. No way am I paying for medical expenses for someone else’s pets, depending on the issue that can be a huge amount of money I can’t afford.
7 Likes
I don’t agree with the way the have done this, but the payment for vet care has been in the T&Cs since I joined over a year ago. Although, I believe the requirement to pay for home repairs is new.
5 Likes
And several other Terms that have been in place yet members are suddenly complaining about them because they didn’t read carefully the first time around.
2 Likes
It would seem reasonable from a legal standpoint that if you refuse to accept the Terms, and cannot access your account then you have a case for a refund of unused membership fees. Several have posted that they requested a refund from THS member services.
If you go that route, I suggest you don’t hold your breath waiting for it.
3 Likes
Is there a term that affects you that you are unhappy about (that has been added yesterday)? You’ve been responsible for vets costs for the last several years so it can’t be that one.
2 Likes
@ray2 is right. The medical expenses thing has been like that for a long time.
I have no idea why it’s that in the rules. Most owners are contactable while they are away, they can easily make a call and pay for it.
Fortunately we’ve only ever had one vet visit in the time we’ve been sitting, and that was just the cost of antibiotics.
2 Likes
Lucky we have you to complain about members complaining.
15 Likes
My pleasure. 
2 Likes
I had to take a pooch to the vet this year and the HO phoned the vet’s office to pay, it wasn’t an issue at all, which it won’t be for most. I strongly encourage sitters to try and avoid doing a sit where the HO doesn’t have an already working relationship with a veterinarian in their area, that can go so many ways.
8 Likes
I’ve been with THS for nearly two years and had NO idea vet costs were my responsibility because logic would tell me that HO’s would have something in place for payment of veterinary care should that arise during a sit, that should NEVER be a part of a sitter’s responsibility so most would assume it wasn’t. I don’t CARE what it says in the T&C’s about it, I’m having that convo with the HO directly and most HO’s are onboard with being billed directly, or phoning the vet directly for payment. No need to be so surly about it, mate. Crikey.
9 Likes
Are you getting some type of compensation from THS? You seem awfully quick to abrasively and arrogantly chastise sitters who have a lot going on in their lives, life busyness that has led them to perhaps not have the time to read EVERY word of the T&C’s. I’ve been with them for nearly two years and haven’t read a word of it, for many reasons, one of those reasons is the things THS HAS “agreed” to do have not come to fruition any time I’ve needed them to, and that’s been at least 4 times this last year. So, if you would, try to stop gaslighting sitters here, it’s getting pretty tiresome!!
12 Likes
Not having time to read the Terms is understandable. Saying things about the Terms that are untrue in a scathing 1 star review, because the person leaving the review is ignorant and doesn’t know what’s in the Terms is not ok.
2 Likes
Completely agree. Before every sit, I discuss vets arrangements with the HO and ask them to inform their vet that they have a sitter coming, so it can be added to their file, especially for independent vets who may be curious as to why a stranger is bringing their animal in. Never have I had any pushback. The one time I’ve had to take a cat to the vet, payment was already set up by the HOs and I had nothing to do with that side of things. I have an upcoming sit with an elderly dog with health issues, and the HO has already arranged for the vet to do home visits and for them to be billed to the HO directly, should anything happen.
Regardless of when these terms were introduced, the notion that I may be responsible for payment seems so out of touch, and I feel the majority of HOs would be embarrassed by such an arrangement, not to mention it may be completely unrealistic for many sitters.
7 Likes
The HO is responsible not you. What you are responsible for is paying in the event that’s the only option and the owner must repay you. First step if something happens to the pet is contact the owner, arrange vet visit, sort out treatment and get the HO to arrange payment. The terms are there for when that can’t be done and there’s a lot of reasons for that.
Just on the payment side the vet they use may not allow an account or storing credit card details. You may have to go to an out-of-hours vet who they may not have used before. Some of these operate on a rotation basis so there may be no account as it could be one of a dozen vets. A lot of vets are now part of giant private equity conglomeration and demand payment up front.
The short of it is that even with an owners best efforts it may come to it that the choice is hand over your credit card or let the animal go without treatment.
People act as if this term is an open invitation for owners to get free treatment through some sort of nefarious scam. It’s simply putting in writing how I hope sitters would act and also places a responsibility for the owners to repay the costs. Personally my preference is that any sitter who at that stage would shrug their shoulders and decide they are not paying and the animal can suffer shouldn’t be a sitter.
4 Likes
Another voice of reason. Well said. This is the logical, reasonable approach as compared to “What do you mean THS says I have to pay the Vet Bills!!!
1 Like
You’re not wrong, Ray, but you’re not taking into account that some sitters may simply not have the means to pre-pay the vet. Similarly, some homeowners may not either. In addition, there are posts on this forum describing situations where pet owners refuse to authorize a vet visit…so what then? It’s not beyond likelihood that a sitter could get stuck with a vet or home repair bill that a homeowner refuses to reimburse, and/or the sitter has a long-running hassle trying to get reimbursed for their outlay. Not cool.
Unless THS is going to guarantee that reimbursement (and regardless of Premium membership status), they shouldn’t be dictating this. It’s between the sitter & the pet owners to negotiate, which is what it really all comes down to in point of fact anyway.
TBH, though — recovery of these types of costs are something that actually would make premium membership have real & tangible value to members. Too bad that wasn’t part of the focus of these changes; it’s a missed opportunity.
7 Likes
@IDOCSTEVE I rarely do this, but:
I would appreciate it if you would please stop nitpicking and attempting to dominate my and others’ posts here. People can barely get a thought in without you jumping all over it and trying to impose your opinion, smothering the conversation or forcing us to respond.
The proper etiquette on a forum is that once you’ve clearly stated your opinion on a topic, there is no need to constantly reiterate it by replying with that same opinion or a variation thereof to every other persons’ post, unless you have new insight. Further, correcting peoples’ grammar is frowned on. (Referring to other posts, not this one.) And last: being aggressive and denigrating is both unnecessary and inappropriate. (The term “man-splaining” comes to mind.)
I’m sorry to be so direct; just trying to clearly set some boundaries. Thanks in advance for your understanding & cooperation.
21 Likes
I am very well into adulthood and have been exchange sitting for more than 20 years, I had also been doing paid sits more than 25 years ago, I don’t need anything regarding veterinary visits and payment of vets [explained] to me, love. Logic will tell any experienced sitter that the sitter and HO have a discussion before the sit commences with regard to how vet visits will be handled during the absence of the HO, 99% of the time the HO will have it in their plan to pay the vet directly, via phone, via credit card, or they will have an arrangement in place with their vet should they be unreachable, as they should ANYWAY in case it is an urgent emergency situation, such as literal life and death. Out of the hundreds of sits I’ve done over the last 20+ years I have not had even ONE instance where I had to pay a vet myself. Not ONE. In fact, I did a sit earlier this year where I needed to take the dog to the vet and the HO phoned the vet to pay them, with their credit card. Sitters should never, not at any time, be financially responsible for payment of any sort if it is not something that is their fault or their responsibility, i.e. a plumbing malfunction or their dog’s health issue, not accident whilst under the care of the sitter, but a HEALTH issue. Hopefully this edit proves to appease whomever has been so offended by the original version.
(Edited in line with the Forum Guidelines)
7 Likes
I suspect THS implemented the rule about sitter responsibility for upfront vet bills in the unlikely scenario that the owner cannot be reached and the vet refuses to treat the pet without payment. Makes sense if you look at it in a “pet-centric” way. We only want what’s best for our pets, they don’t get to make those sorts of choices, they depend on us for their very survival.
When I apply for a sit I write in my covering message that if we are accepted we ask that the pet parent informs their vets they are going away and to ensure a payment method is left just in case. I also add that in 10yrs of sitting and over 50 sits we have never needed to use a vet.
4 Likes