Taking the sit knowing they had a roommate is on you. Yes it breaks THS Ts & Cs but you knew up front and are a grown up so your choice. The separate apt and person downstairs not cool at all as dumped on you on arrival. All credit to you for mentioning them in your review & personally, would block the host and flag the listing and her message to you to THS support so they can sort it. #onwardsandupwards
I look at it this way, If the house sit was fun and enjoyable on the last few days I will give it 5 stars no matter what, but take of points in the subcategories depending on how the sit was described, communication etc.
In the review I will always mention the things that were not mentioned during the initial call, or in the welcome guide.
For example I had a house sit, arrived at it and the dog had flees and instead of 1 cat there were 9 outdoor cats that hung around the house at all times. I mentioned both in the review.
Iām not covering for others who choose to lie, but I will always wrap it up with a compliment at the end. I think the owners who take offence are usually delusional and will make a scene about it. Ones who donāt say anything are ones that understand what I mentioned was factufal and will hopefully do better in the future.
Not every sit will be perfect, but if a house owner and sitter is prepared to take some points on board, I find to be better suited to this house sitting gig. It means they are not hiding their shortcomings but happy to work on them.
To answer your questions ā No, there is no scenario where a sitter should agree to omit something pertinent from a review. The contente of the review shouldnāt even be talked about in the initial chat.
I think the homeowner was being intentionally dishonest because she probably knows that having third parties at the house is against THS rules and would be a deal breaker for most people.
I donāt see a way that THS could or should change the rules for HOs to be able to leave pertinent info off the listing. This is unfair to sitters and pets.
Thank you for leaving an honest review. Iām sorry that the HO made you feel like you did something wrong.
@lotus - you did the right thing by leaving a review and explaining the reason why you docked a star.
Third parties are not allowed as you know but some sitters still go ahead. They have no recourse if things go wrong.
It is the hostās interest to declare third parties in their listing or at the very least in the pre confirmation chat. If not a sitter could arrive and would be within their rights to walk away and not commence the sit.
With regard to discussing reviews before publication. That totally makes a mockery of blind reviews. There was a situation recently where the host and sitter decided to overlook the fact that the sit was a total disaster and promised each other a great review.
One kept to their side of the ābargainā and one didnāt.
That didnāt end well at all.
she 100% knew about it, thatās why she complained afterwards, because she knew she could not do anything about the review herself and she knows it will affect her ability to get sits
It sounds like the homeowner assummed or forgot to mention when she told you there was a third party present that you would not mention this in a review. Her bad. If you agreed to do the sit with the third party present, thatās on you. Iām confused: Were the points off because of the roommate or because of the first floor tenants in a separate apartment? Was that apartmet completely separate? It feels like if you agreed to allow her to violate the 3rd party rules, you should not have taken off points for the roommate being there. Itās like divorcing someone for cheating when you have an open marriage.
I doubt sheās getting kicked off for having the roommate. (Even if someone complained THS would probably just warn her about the policy) but probably a lot of other sitters arenāt going to apply because theyāll see your review. You applied because once you were talking to her and she mentioned it, you decided to go with it. You probably would not have replied if she openly mentioned it. Other people probably decline the sit when she mentions it. You saved them some time!
Just tell her you are not going to change your honest review. This is not your problem.
You did the right thing and thereās nothing you can do about what you published in your review. The host has a problem of their own making. I would suggest watching for the host to respond to your review. If there is a response by the host and itās dishonest or claims youāre being dishonest, you might need to open an official Member Dispute with THS.
@lotus Accuracy of the listing is about the level of transparency and information the host chooses to include when publishing it for people to consider. Itās not about what may later be agreed upon beyond the T&Cs.
You did other travelers a favor by being transparent in your review, since the host clearly isnāt..and seems fully aware of it.
And frankly, you did her a favor as well; not only did you choose not to report her straight away over such a massive dealbreaker, but you also agreed to proceed with the arrangement and only deducted 1 star for openly misleading people in the listing.
The answer to this general questions for me is yes, for example if they let me use their car but normally dont do this and dont want that in the review. It is pertinent to the review but something I would omit if requested. If theyāve done something really nice for me as a sitter that they wouldnāt do for all sitters, I would happily oblige leaving it out of the review.
BUT in your scenario I would NOT omit a renter on site (separate entry/space and all) or a roommate under roof in the same living space as you - this had BOTH if I am understanding correctly. The renter in their own quarters on site is not in itself breaking a THS rule to my understanding (it is to be disclosed but not forbidden), but the roommate in your space absolutely is forbidden.
You did the right thing in this instance and I am appalled that the HO is shaming you for outing her. I thank you for your honesty and future potential applicants will thank you too.
How is that utter nonsense?! Some dogs bite. They also need care. Some pet sitters are willing and able to provide such care and should be able to decide whether to do so, no? What is damaging to the community is all the people, HOs and sitters, who decide for whatever reason that honesty is not the best policy.
You accepted this change during your sit? Or you knew about it before showing up? I think you mentioned else were that you may have omitted this from the review, is that correct? To me, this is a really big problem That should be divulged in a Sitters review of HO for the future people.
I took points off for ālisting accuracyā because there were two glaring omissions (the roommate and the tenant). When I told the HO why I deducted stars after she asked, she replied that the tenant didnāt need to be disclosed as they live in a completely separated area, but she always mentions it in person.
I really canāt figure out what to make of the HO and her decisions around this. Overall she was an excellent host: kind, generous, and experienced enough to provide things like luggage racks, dedicated shelf space, etc. But she seems to be convinced that she will instantly be kicked off THS if the word roommate appears on her profile. But then there is also the tenant which she could mention in her profile but doesnāt. 
You didnāt put her in a difficult situation. She did, by breaking THS rules. You are absolutely correct to mention this so that future sitters are warned. Thereās no reason for you to be nice to this homeowner, and every reason not to enable her flout THS rules. Other sitters deserve to know the truth about this sit before they apply. I would have deducted more than one star for accuracy of listing
I think you did the right thing mentioning it.
Personally, rather than outright disallowing it, I think the roommate issue could be something that is decided on between hosts and sitters, with the terms and conditions clearly stating that no third parties may occupy the home unless explicitly agreed upon by the sitter prior to confirmation or something along those lines.
I imagine most people would not be interested for a host of reasons, from safety concerns to wrongly being held responsible for something the roommate did, but I am sure there are plenty of people who may not mind, as evidenced by your decision. Some may even enjoy having some company and the chance to meet new people. Sitters are capable of deciding for themselves what they are willing and not willing to do.
And I imagine that there are plenty of sits that take place with third parties present where it is agreed upon beforehand, again as evidenced by your situation.
So long as communication is clear and everyone is on board I think most things should be left to the parties involved to negotiate, etcā¦
It makes no sense to me not to mention the tenant but Iām not sure what the rule is. It feels like it should be mentioned as part of the home description. Itās obvious if someone describes an apartment that there are other people in the hallways and elevators, but if someone has a house, itās not obvious if another family is living downstairs or there is a ground floor studio rented out. Individual sitters have individual needs so the more information the better. Personally, I donāt think Iād deduct points in a review for accuracy if a separate apartment wasnāt mentioned, but Iād probably mention it especially if it became relevant eg I was aware that they might hear me stomping around or I heard music from their apartment or something.
There are all sorts of people literally combing through listings and calling out violations. So I can understand her worries regarding the roommate. But to me if she canāt list the roommate, the work around is not to go around this by making secret deals. Personally, I canāt imagine a situation where I would want a sit with a roommate. But if I was willing to accept the roommate because I needed to be in that area, or there was something else super appealing about the sit, my workaround probably would have been a willingness to take the sit off-site so neither of us would be violating rules.
Where was that sit ? You can answer me in a private message if you prefer.
Thanks
I would but being the one in charge of the house and pets and having someone else in the house, whose behaviour and habits are unknown to me, is beyond my comfort level. I have refused two otherwise very desirable sits because of this. The situation was temporary and would have only overlapped my stay by a few days so I didnāt report it, just made them aware it was against T&Cs.
Well it looks like someone must have reported her listing because I can no longer access it, and I honestly feel even worse now. I was really trying to do someone a favor when I agreed to the sit, but it seems I may have inadvertently thrown them under a bus. 
She shouldnāt be allowed to list sits if sheās knowingly violating terms.
If you feel for her so much, you can always sit for her off-platform.
Think of it like this- they get rent from lodgers so can afford to pay for professional sitters ok. At least future trusting sitters wonāt get caught out now. Didnāt the HO throw you under the Bus first (using your analogy) you survived and gave a Witness Statement thatās all.