I’ve searched both in the THS code of conduct guidelines and also in all these forum topics but haven’t found this particular question addressed anywhere: Is it against THS rules for a homeowner to offer to pay a sitter’s transportation costs to a sit? (Or I guess the only possible violation would be if the sitter accepts and this exchange is completed.)
I know that it’s against the rules for a sitter to even ask for this, but what if a HO offers it without any prompting by the sitter, because they know the transportation is expensive and they really want a particular sitter that they trust (or it’s last minute and they’re in a bind).
The sitter does not “make” any money as it’s an exact reimbursement of the cost of their transportation. On the other hand, this is a cost that the sitter normally pays, so it is a financial benefit to them.
If a host volunteers (versus any sitter asking), why would that be any different from say a host making any other gifts, such as cash, gift cards, groceries, meals, etc.? Any gifts would essentially benefit sitters.
BTW, a pair of hosts offered to buy my r/t airfare so I would repeat sit for them. They made the purchase with rewards points, so I never received money. But had they made the offer and reimbursed me, there would essentially be no difference.
Another pair of hosts offered r/t airport shuttle costs, total $80 USD, also unsolicited by me. When I arrived, they had clipped 100 bucks to a folder full of sightseeing info for me.
Why not? If the owner, unprompted, offers to pay for transport, that seems perfectly reasonable to me. No different than offering a railway station pick-up or filling the fridge for the sitter.
@NETime, interesting question. Just perused seemingly relevant parts of THS Terms & Conditions and did not find any related language. S1.1.5 outlines platform not intended for employment relationships and compensation. While may have missed it, did not find language that either permits or prohibits expense reimbursement (travel or otherwise). S2.2.1 “The arrangement between Pet Parents and Sitters is of a private, domestic arrangement” does appear to detach THS from any specific terms agreed by Pet Parent and Housesitter.
That said, it is our understanding that housesitters may not advertise or propose compensation to Pet Parents. But the housesit experience is a trade. Give and take. That trade may vary depending on PP and HS situation; busy time of year; pet parent preferences; or other factors. Some Pet Parents may voluntarily offer payment of expenses or otherwise (travel, vehicle, gift cards, etc) - whether to proactively incentivize housesitter to accept the housesit; or to reactively demonstrate appreciation for property/pet care. How frequently this occurs is unknown - we’ve received significant voluntary gifts on perhaps 10-15% of our sits. Nothing prevents either party from offering gifts. As housesitters, we often leave a token gift for the pet parent on their return and basic foodstuffs. At some level, we’re all just people.
It’s a great question, and you’re right — it’s surprisingly hard to find anything in THS wording that speaks directly to travel reimbursement.
Here’s what the policy does say clearly: the only reimbursement a homeowner is allowed to give a sitter is for vet bills.
“I will provide my vet’s contact details and agree to refund my sitter for any vet costs which may arise during a house sit.”
Everything else falls under the general guidance that the sit is a non-financial exchange — no money changing hands, no payments for the sit itself.
And this is where the gap appears: THS never explicitly mentions travel or transport reimbursement. It’s simply not addressed. So we end up relying on the spirit of the rules rather than a single clear sentence.
The intention behind the model is to keep things simple and pressure-free. Once money enters the picture, even as a kind gesture, it can change the tone of the arrangement. A sitter might feel they “owe” the HO something extra, or the HO might feel they’ve taken on a different kind of responsibility. THS is trying to avoid all of that.
So the friendliest, safest reading of the policy is: sitters cover their own travel, and homeowners don’t reimburse it — even when offered with the best of intentions. That keeps everything within THS support and avoids any subtle you-owe-me dynamic on either side.
I can see that it would not be right for a sitter to accept payment, even if the owner offers it spontaneously.
Reimbursement for an expense to me is different. This isn’t “pay” or something extra for the sitter that they can use like regular income. It’s a straightforward reimbursement for something the sitter is out of pocket on.
As Maggie noted, is there a difference between that and the HO stocking the kitchen with all kinds of food and drink for the sitter to enjoy while they are there? That could cost the HO more than reimbursement for a train or plane ticket or rental car. Is it the type of item that’s been reimbursed, or the cost/amount?
And if sitters should accept nothing, what about gifts such as Maggie also describes and which many sitters receive from HOs – gift cards of various kinds, treating them to a dinner out when they arrive, bottles of wine, expensive chocolates or other treats? Many people here report receiving these gifts. Are they all “wrong” for doing so?
I definitely don’t see a problem if the host offers to pay travel costs without a sitter starting that conversation. Putting it differently, if a sitter is not using THS to generate income, not a problem. Plus it’s not like the host or sitter is going to report transferred monies to THS.
I think a reasonable common sense test is whether an ask or an offer might trigger a complaint to THS by either party. If not, whatever both parties agree on is copacetic.
I wouldn’t phrase it like that. Vet costs reimbursement is not “allowed”, it’s “required” and the fact that something is not specifically allowed does not mean it’s forbidden.
I agree. There is no wording that suggests in any way this is the only reimbursement that hosts can give to sitters. It’s merely stating that this is a requirement (to reimburse vet bills that the sitter has already paid). That’s why I am pointing out that there’s a black hole of things that aren’t specified. And maybe that’s intentional.
Some hosts also have volunteered to lend me their cars, which can add up to more than airfare in various cases (versus a rental car or ride shares). That happens with various sits, as everyone knows. That’s also transportation.
I’ve also had hosts who voluntarily filled the tank in their car, saying that I shouldn’t have to spend any money to take their dog out. And none of those dogs needed to be driven anywhere — I chose to take them out, because I figured they’d enjoy it, and their humans appreciated that.
In one case, I even had my own wheels with me, which the hosts knew, and yet they offered me theirs, because their dog was used to it. In turn, I offered to drive them to the airport, which saved them hiring a ride share, also a transportation cost.
Yet another set of hosts not only left me their car, but also a golf cart and bicycle. All such uses benefited me transportation wise.
If there’s no soliciting going on, who’s going to complain? I have great relationships with all of my hosts and get asked back, with five-star reviews across the board.
I think this gets a little tricky. I don’t work for THS, so I think it’s not against the rules for a homeowner to sweeten the pot any way they want. But it might be for a sitter to suggest or ask for payment.
t would also involve a lot of trust. Remember no one works for THS so if this deal goes wrong, they aren’t going to help. What would I do send them a ticket or reimburse them? What if I sent a sitter money and they didn’t show? How do I get my money back?
Maybe if you had a sitter who sat before who you would love to have back and they tell you nope, can’t afford the plane fare, so you make a decision to gift it to them, but I wouldn’t offer to pay a stranger to come sit for me through THS and ultimately paying their fare is paying them.
We find that use of Pet Parent vehicle can significantly impact our sit selection in UK where car rentals for non-residents, especially in summertime, is expensive and some lovely listings are in rural locations. As you rightly note, from a housesitter perspective then avoided car rental costs can exceed international flight costs. Use of car can also materially improve the quality of care for dogs and give comfort on any travel to vet (which we’ve never had to do).
Use of vehicle is expressly stated within THS listing. So we consider this different to voluntary payment of expenses, e.g. travel, that is not part of THS listing.
I’ve had cars offered to me that were not mentioned at all in the sit listings. I figure some hosts decide, depending on how they feel about chatting with potential sitters.
In one of the cases, I had already arrived for a handoff and happened to mention that I might take the dog to the beach, three hours round trip. That’s when the hosts offered their car and gassed it up, saying they’d be happy if I took their dog and I shouldn’t spend money to do that. I wasn’t even looking to use their car — I had driven my own car there.
Personally, I don’t take sits where I’d need or want wheels unless I’m prepared to rent my own or to ride share (or I have my car with me). I sit in only urban areas anyway, so I could also take public transit, though I rarely do.
But I doubt THS cares unless someone reports that a sitter has solicited money. Personally, I don’t need everything spelled out. And it’s always an easy choice for me: If something is offered to me, then all I have to do is decide whether to accept based on my preference and logic. Just generally, THS expects people to work things out on their own. Not a problem for me and lots of other folks.
Yes, it can definitely change the tone of the arrangement if money gets in the picture, as it could feed different expectations and entitlement.
It is not surprising that THS avoid the topic. Even if you call it «reimbursement» it could influence also whether it is considered «work», should be taxed (or at least reported as possible tax object) and as consequence, also visa considerations.
I think the big difference is between asking for something and being offered. Sitters cannot ask for payment for housesitting or travel costs but if something ‘financial’ is offered e.g in the form of a tip, meal Voucher or use of car I see no problem at all.
We are heading to a 2 month sit in Australia where the hosts have organised a car for us. We had asked in our application if there was a car available but they are using their own car for their big road trip. They seemed very interested though, and said they’d look into solutions.. They put us on the ‘back burner’ initially and did not pursue further contact at that point as I guess they hadn’t factored in the possibility of car costs. However, 2 weeks later, after they’d checked out all their other applicants, they came back to us saying we were absolutely their first choice and they were willing to rent a car for us! As a car was a deal breaker for us, and we were the first choice for them, we are all happy with the outcome!
