I would like to ask how you address the issue of surveillance cameras in the homes where we stay. In many of the houses I’ve visited, there have been cameras, and we are left with no choice but to trust that they are turned off and that the owners are not watching us. In some cases, I have even found hidden cameras.
Although I’m not doing anything that would make me feel guilty, I do feel the constant tension of being watched, which goes against our right to privacy. I believe homeowners are not fully respecting their side of the agreement by keeping these cameras active during a sit.
Are owners reminded that they are not allowed to have cameras in private areas? I think they should receive clear reminders about the legal implications and the seriousness of this issue.
I would also like to add that, in some cases, I’ve noticed that owners use the GPS on the dog’s collar to monitor where I walk and for how long. This adds to the feeling of being constantly watched and creates unnecessary pressure.
Sometimes, what is meant to be an exchange starts to feel more like a job with the added stress of being monitored by a boss. This goes against the spirit of trust and mutual respect that should define this kind of experience.
Welcome to the Forum it’s lovely to have you here!
It’s absolutely fine to start your own topic asking for opinions from others, but in this case you’re in luck as lots of our members have similar concerns, so there’s existing topics which you might find helpful and validating to read through.
Why are homeowners allowed to disregard the rules regarding surveillance? And why doesn’t the TrustedHousesitters community actively remind them of the clear prohibition of cameras inside the home?
This is a serious concern. The use of indoor cameras and in some cases, even hidden ones is not only a violation of privacy, but it also creates a stressful and uncomfortable atmosphere for sitters. It feels as though these rules are not being properly enforced, and that sitters are left to simply accept this situation in silence.
I believe the platform should take stronger action to inform and remind homeowners that the use of indoor surveillance during a sit is not only against policy but could also be illegal in many countries. Sitters should feel safe, respected, and trusted not monitored.
Thank you Jenny!
Homeowners aren’t allowed to disregard the rules regarding indoor cameras. Our Camera & Recording Devices Policy clearly set out our expectations for homeowners, and these should be followed to the letter.
I hear everything you’re saying, it’s in line with the feedback that we’ve had from other members on the Forum, and we do pass along feedback to the wider team whenever we can as we know it’s an important issue.
I’ll be happy to pass your words over to the team, and if we’re made aware of any changes to how we educate homeowners in future, then we’ll be happy to update our Forum members.
In the meantime we’d always encourage members who discover a camera on site to reach out to our Membership Services team as soon as they can, so that we can help them.
My current sit is the first one when I’ve encountered a camera, in the utility room where the dogs sleep, or stay for longer periods during the day. I’m only the second sitter for the HO, I’m guessing that they weren’t aware of the rules so I’ll gently let them know. I’m not troubled by the presence of the camera, it’s not worth making a fuss about on this occasion.
I have a network tool Fing installed on my laptop and phone that I can use to scan for devices in a home and identify many of them.
We do a regular THS sit that has a camera in the mud room - it’s always been unplugged by the hosts before we arrive .
When they did the first handover they showed us how to unplug it incase they forgot to do so .
They would usually use it to keep an eye on the dogs when they are out ( via an app on their phone ) .
They don’t need to do that whilst a sitter is in their home . It was all disclosed in their listing and reiterated in the Welcome Guide .
The tracker on the dogs collar is not for tracking you, its in case the dog escapes, so you would be able to find it. Very common. We did a sit with a cat that wandered far and wide, with a tracker, so we always knew where it was. Just think what you would do if the dog escaped.
They aren’t using it to monitor you, but to monitor the dog. I’m reasonably sure they have it on all the time maybe due to an incident where the dog went missing or for the fear of it. Maybe GPS collars should be disclosed, but as a sitter it doesn’t bother me.
I suppose it woud bother me if the home owner commented that I was walking the dog enough or something.
Then again, I don’t sit dogs much through THS. However, when I did a THS dogsit and we met with the owners at the end, they had been checking on their last day with the GPS. We were out with the dog when they got back and when we finally got back, they were very impressed that we’d had the dog out for a 3 mile urban hike!
That sounds great! And totally different because I found totally normal that they like to have an eye to their pets while we are away…or in some place of the house where I’m not walking
Of course, that device is obviously meant for the dog. I know very well they didn’t get it to keep an eye on me. But because of that tracker the dog wears, they can see how long I’ve been walking and where I’ve been. And that’s a way of monitoring me, too.
The other day, for example, they told me that since it was so hot, I should try not to stay out with the dog for too long. And that made me realize just how much I was being watched.
Dear Marion…
No one is complaining about the tracker in case the dog gets lost that’s not the issue. All I’m saying is that, because of it, they’re also able to monitor how much I walk, at what times, and where I go. And that, at least for me, makes me feel watched plain and simple. That’s all I meant to say.
Hi Alma7, I think that was a question for me about the app. Yes, it’s pretty easy to use and to run a scan, interpreting what is found is reasonably straightforward.
I understand that is how it made you feel. But here is another perspective: The owners might not have been monitoring the GPS or micro-managing. They could simply be monitoring the weather at home and concerned about the dog not being walked for too long, and trying to communicate with you or update you about their concerns. I coud see this as a homeowner especially if I’d left a general guideline about the length of walks and I wanted to make sure the sitter knew I didn’t want them to overtax the dog or themselves in the heat and that I didn’t want them to actually do what I’d said exacty as written in the guide because of this unforeseen cirmcumstance.
We sat a young dog with a GPS tracker the owners thought we’d taken it on very long walks- we hadn’t as we’d carried/trolleyed the mini puppy for most of it!
it’s lovely to have you here!
