No, I was their first TH sit. Hence why I no longer volunteer as the guinea pig for sits. I only consider ones with multiple reviews, I don’t care how good it looks!! 
(this sit looked really good on paper and I genuinely liked the owners, until they unconscionably put me in harms way!)
This dog sounds a little psycho not aggressive. To sit at your feet and then bite you. Bite the owner in the face? The fact that it was a doberman is very scary, but it could have been a Shih Tzu. There was something very wrong that needed to be addressed.
We arrived at a sit to be told one dog had gone into full attack mode during a walk the day before… we also heard from the gardeners that they had been bitten previously! This hadn’t been disclosed although the HO had said they themselves had been snapped at but it had been ‘their fault’….the HO now takes the dogs away with them…
As the owner of a sometimes reactive rescue dog, I sometime feel persecuted by these type of posts! It saddens me that people will only sit ‘small, easy dogs’. So those of us who have rescued dogs who may have some issues (I’d have issues too if I’d been stuck in a kill shelter), aren’t allowed the opportunity of a holiday!
I am always very upfront about my dog, and explain fully what can be expected – reactivity/barking/pulling to certain dogs (not all) and hates delivery people to the house. She is otherwise a beautiful, sensitive, affectionate soul. Dogs can’t be expected to all be easy, fluffy pooches that are friendly to everyone – humans aren’t! Reactivity is not always aggression, it is predominantly fear-based, and anyone with a proper understanding of dogs would know this. Obviously a dog that has a history of actual attacks and biting should not be left with a sitter, but sometimes it feels like THS sitters are much more in it for the house and location, not to bond and care for the pet.
Depending on the country, you could sue them with a civil lawsuit, even if they were first-time hosts (or regardless of THS membership or not). That’s because they knowingly put you in harm’s way.
Of course, that’s up to you, but I mention it, because other hosts should know about such potential consequences if they’re tempted to expose others to their dangerous dogs.
In many countries, that would automatically cause their homeowners’ insurer to cancel their coverage. And that would typically cause other insurers to blackball them, because insurers often pool info. That in turn would potentially cause the dog owner’s mortgage lender to demand immediate repayment of their entire loan, because lenders don’t want to lend without insurance protection – they usually write that into their contracts.
Whether someone is a THS host or otherwise, there often are penalties for knowingly exposing others to dangers. So even if some dog owners lack a conscience about putting others in harm’s way, they might want to protect their own finances and lifestyle.
Having rescued a highly fearful dog who’s also highly reactive, I’d say that people should know what they’re taking on responsibility wise, especially if their dog is aggressive – it’s no one else’s problem to solve if the dog owner can’t take a vacation.
There are paid professionals who can sit and ones who train dogs. And it’s unreasonable to expect that anyone who volunteers to sit via THS to take on a dog and risk getting bitten or even dealing with unmanageable pets.
Sitters risk pet owners who lie or mislead, so it’s logical to be wary, and that doesn’t mean they only care about staying at your home or anyone else’s. Of course people logically and naturally value their own safety and peace of mind. They have no obligation to risk their well-being because someone else chose to rescue a dog.
Personally, the choice we made to rescue our dog means that we never leave him with THS sitters. We always pay professionals to care for him when we’re away. If we couldn’t afford that, we’d take him with us or not travel, or we wouldn’t have a dog like this.
I once sat a reactive dog, larger pittish mix. And I would have walked the dog and such but the HO was very controlling. Had a list of hand and arm commands she expected me to learn and use for a week long sit. I walked the dog once in the neighborhood but saw 2 other dogs, which I managed to stay away from and managed the dog but the owner freaked when she learned there were 2 other dogs on the street when I walked it. It was not big on fetch. Trying to get it to exercise was an issue. I tried, and I have sat a number of reactive dogs. I had an excellent sit in Atlanta with a large reactive dog, in an apartment so we had to get out. The HO was amazed that I took it to the park every day, which was a hike. And I had to manage the dog when sometimes a small dog, off leash would run up. But that is different than a dog that bites an owner in the face.
No idea where you are in the world @Loobyloo but we love sitting big rescue dogs. Some favourite repeats are for a duo of German Shepherds with a combined weight of 82kgs and another for three rescues that are a GSP, Kangol & Cypriot terrier mix! Or two big Heinz 57s of collie/kangol combo that howl to morning prayer & come on full village shopping trips as our bouncer and protector. Way more fun than mini things, “proper dog size” as my Pops would say 
We’ve found THS to be full of rescues so am sure there’s lots of sitters for you out there. #keepusposted
Well that really lifted my spirits @Cuttlefish , thank you so much for posting that! Yes I have had a few comments along the lines of ‘Now that’s a proper dog!’ 
We are based in Scotland (Edinburgh) – I’ll bookmark your profile for future ref, should you ever fancy a Scottish sit! 
I am currently on a sit with two senior dogs who have a combined weight of 7lbs. They’re sweet and easy dogs, but I much prefer larger, adventurous dogs. I would say that about half of my sits have been for rescue dogs. I always appreciate the time owners take to discuss how they read or manage any challenging behavior.
I think your mention of “big” here is important. Our last dog would have been inapproprate for Trusted Housesitters as she could be fear aggressive towards humans, and had a strong herding instinct. She was also reactive to other dogs and always on patrol for food and whatever she could grab on the street. However, because she weighed around 35 lbs and we used a harness, and I’m pretty sure-footed, I never had a problmen walking her on the leash. I recently did a paid walking gig involving a larger – 70+ pound reactive dog. While I could stay on my feet, the constant tension of having to watch out for other dogs and be prepared at all times in case she decided to lunge, was very unpleasant and worrisome. When I had to scoop (this was in a city), I was terrified that while my attention was distracted, something might happen. I would not do this again.
Yes it was the level of vigilance and alertness that we’d underestimated when sitting 2 reactive dogs- it was exhausting but we did it and everyone was ok. The HO was acclimatised to it I suppose….so although they knew it was a more complex sit they had never been sitters so couldn’t imagine how it might be for us. This is something it’s very hard to capture in a listing - the quality of sharing a living space with complex dogs, yes you can do it but do you want to?
That is the point. It is the level of vigilance and alertness on walks that is stressful and exhausting. So different than walking easy, little dogs. But there is a level of satisfaction giving them a great walk, which they usually don’t get. The dog in Atlanta and he was easily 80 lbs, actually got better, seemed to realize he was getting this walk to the park for 90 minutes every day. And a few other walks. And got used to my cues. But it wasn’t relaxing.
Great that you mentioned walking the dog in the city; location, population, visibility, and traffic can have an impact on managing challenges. I have a repeat sit for a trio of adorable, adventurous pups, one of them is a bit leash aggressive and protective of the others, so I take them to a preserve that is not too busy with wide open spaces, so we can see any approaching dogs in advance and adjust our path if needed. I can’t imagine walking all three of them on city streets.
I applaud you for walking 3 at a time. I was just searching for a sit on my way back from the west from winter and found one in Albuquerque. 4 dogs. Not applying.
I usually pass on sits with more than 2, but when I first sat for this family, the youngest was only 8 weeks old and too cute to resist. Aside from the momma dog’s protective warnings and the occasional tangling of leashes, the 3 girls walk pretty well together.
The most reasonable, responsible and applaudable post I’ve read in a very long time. I take my hat off to you, @Maggie8K !
We too have happily cared for rescues, but I don’t think that’s the issue here? It’s surely about full and honest disclosure, for sitters to make an informed choice (as is our absolute right, for our own wellbeing). Knowing about a dog’s problematic history and associated issues, and being made aware of tactics successfully employed by the PP, is vital.
We apply for sits which particularly appeal for various reasons, and sometimes that reason is the dog with some problems (some of our most memorable sits were for rescues who had previously experienced terrible cruelty and abandonment. They were absolute darlings and I think we loved them even more because we understood their quirks).
Transparency is paramount.
The reply was to @Loobyloo specifically who commented that sitters only wanted small dogs and that she had bigger, rescue dogs so that was the context of my comment. Small, medium or big we want to know any issues as much as the next sitter. Fortunately so far so good. #transparencywins
Some sitters prefer small dogs, some large dogs, some will only sit for cats, some will prefer rabbits or small pets, some horses. Only sitters interested in caring for your large, rescue dog will apply for your sits, and that’s surely how it should be. It’s not about ‘persecution’, but about preferences and choice.
I think it’s grossly unfair - and inaccurate - to assume that, if sitters choose not to sit for a large or reactive dog, they are not interested in bonding with and caring for the pet. We all chose sits for varying reasons, but the pets are central to those choices.