I have interviewed for several 1–2 week sits where homeowners required the sitter to transport their dog(s) in the sitter’s own vehicle to beaches, dog parks, or other locations that were not within walking distance. When I explained that I preferred to walk the dogs in the neighborhood, or that I would be happy to transport them if the homeowner provided their own vehicle, they chose another sitter.
I don’t think homeowners should expect sitters to use their personal vehicles to fulfill routine pet care. Doing so adds fuel costs, wear and tear on the sitter’s vehicle, additional travel time, and the risk of damage or extensive cleaning. It also creates liability if there is an accident or if a dog escapes in an unfamiliar location.
These are unpaid sits based on an exchange of pet care for accommodation. Requiring a sitter to provide their own vehicle as part of the arrangement shifts additional costs and risk onto the sitter. If transportation is essential to the pet’s routine, I believe homeowners should either provide their own vehicle or make it clear that using a personal vehicle is entirely optional.
Your thinking is perfectly reasonable. This is just one of the many aspects of a sit where the requests/preferences of the hosts and sitters will not always be in alignment.
For sits where dogs must be driven somewhere for their daily walks, I think it is a good idea to put that right in the listing, and then sitters who would not want to do this can skip over, or–if they would willing if provided a car-- inquire right in their application message, if one is provided for this purpose.
Last year we had a sit where the hosts asked if we minded sometimes taking the dog to a couple of spots they walked her at least occasionally and we were fine with it–they weren’t far and they provided a covering for our seat on which she could sit. Even if they would have offered the use of their own car we would have likely used ours anyway–we are all about risk minimization and if we had our own car, no need to risk taking theirs and having something happen with it. But everyone is different.
In my many years of sitting, this scenario of dogs needing to be driven to a walking spot every day either out of absolute necessity or just the strict preference of the host has been very rare–I can only recall one sit where it was absolutely necessary because they lived in a somewhat rural area where the main road had no shoulders or sidewalks and it was pretty heavily traveled by cars going very fast.
This was several years ago and we weren’t made aware of this until we got to the sit–it was for 2 months so it got pretty tedious pretty fast. I don’t think they purposely withheld the information, I just don’t think it occurred to them to bring it up for whatever reason. I wouldn’t do a sit like that again regardless of whether it was my car or theirs.
But if you seem to be encountering this more frequently and it is one of your deal breakers–at least if required to do so with your own vehicle–you may want to inquire about this right upfront when applying. I don’t have many deal breakers but for the ones I do, if the listing doesn’t include the relevant information I would need to know, I always ask right away–time saver for everyone.
I agree that asking the question early is a good idea. It’s a real time saver for both sitters and homeowners.
In our experience, if a dog’s normal routine genuinely requires being driven to a beach, dog park or similar every day, we’ve found it’s perfectly reasonable to ask whether the homeowner has a vehicle available for the sitter to use. If maintaining that routine is important to them, providing the means to do so seems fair.
If they don’t have a vehicle available, we’d ask whether they’re comfortable with the dog having longer neighbourhood walks instead while they’re away. Some homeowners are happy with that, while others would prefer a sitter who is willing to use their own car.
For us, it’s not really about the driving itself. It’s about the expectation that a sitter should provide their own vehicle, along with the fuel, wear and tear, and the additional responsibility that comes with transporting someone else’s pet. That feels different from the usual exchange of pet care for accommodation.
So we’d simply ask the question upfront if it isn’t clear in the listing: “Does your dog’s routine require transport, and if so, is a vehicle available for the sitter?” That way everyone knows what’s expected before committing.
I agree that asking the question early is a great idea and a real time saver for both sitters and homeowners. I actually think it would be even better if homeowners included this expectation clearly in their listing from the start. That would allow sitters to decide upfront whether it’s a good fit, rather than spending significant time on interviews or even traveling for a pre-sit meeting only to discover that providing personal vehicle use is a requirement.
I’ve personally spent 45 minutes or more being interviewed, and in some cases traveled to meet a homeowner, only to not be selected because I wasn’t willing to agree to use my own vehicle to transport a pet. If that expectation had been stated in the listing, everyone’s time could have been saved.
I think the key issue is transparency. Using a sitter’s personal vehicle involves more than just driving—it includes fuel costs, mileage, wear and tear, insurance considerations, and taking on responsibility for transporting someone else’s pet. Some sitters may be completely comfortable with that, while others may not, and both choices are reasonable.
Clear expectations in the listing help homeowners find the right sitter and help sitters choose sits that align with their comfort level and responsibilities. I will only transport in my car in case of emergencies including vet care or evacuation. I previously have taken dogs in my car and then had to clean up after them and dealing with them jumping into the front seat from the back seat while the vehicle was in motion as they owners did not provide any kind of pet carrier.
Yeah, same. Not comfortable putting dogs in our car either. That would be a hard pass. If under “responsibility” it mentions taking dogs to a dog park or beach, etc, that would be one of my questions right from the start.
Yes we agree and we have withdrawn our application after the video call when we discovered that the 2 big dogs could not be walked directly from the home and needed to be transported in our car for their daily exercise .
We now have a standard question where is the dog walked ? As it is a deal breaker we ask this before arranging a video call .
I completely agree with you and we have discussed this on the forum before. Here’s a link to the query regarding this topic that I posted in December, which may assist you:
I turned down a sit to Hawaii a couple of years ago because she wanted the dog driven to a park and expected us to use our rental car because she wa worried about something happening to her “luxury car”.
All you need to ask is “can the dog be walked straight from home?” If not, and they won’t provide the car the dog is used to travelling in or offer renumeration for using your own car, end of!
Not only do these owners want free pet sit, also they want to take advantage of sitters, avoid. I wonder what they have to offer apart from accommodation.
I did a sit once where my spouse stayed for a bit and then had to leave and took his car. I couldn’t drive the owner’s car (stick shift) like my spouse had, so I rented a car just to take the dog on her preferred walk on a hiking trail that the owner had shown me. The dog refused to get into the rental car!! So I spent $ for no purpose.
We’ve been sitting for over 10 years now and have always used our own car if sitting in our home country. In fact o e of the questions I ask HOs is “Is your dog ok in the car?”
We like taking the dog(s) to beaches and areas away from the home. On our current sit we have 4 dogs to transport
Our primary vehicle is a Sprinter RV. Unless the HO has dog crate(s), it is not safe to transport a dog in our vehicle. Any sudden stop would send the dog flying.
Once we explain this to the HOs, they generally agree to let us use their vehicle for local transportation.
Note: most car rental companies in the U.S. don’t allow pets in their vehicles. Any hair/dirt will trigger a hefty fine.
I’ve never had trouble bringing sit dogs in rental cars in the U.S. I also have driven sit dogs in my own car and in our Sprinter RV. All of our vehicles have dog restraints and I pack one if I expect to drive a dog in a rental.
If a host seemed entitled about my driving their dog in my car, that would put me off the sit, not because of the driving a dog, but because of the entitlement.
Fine if it’s your decision, but when the owners expect you to transport their dogs in your own car without offering petrol money or to clean your car inside
I agree Maggie, a long term sitter with TH I’m honestly starting to wonder why some people even apply to be sitters. I thought the whole original concept was to match pet owners and their homes with like minded sitters. If you love dogs why on earth would you not mind taking them out in your car? Just make sure to ask the owners if they have a seat belt harness and if you can use their towels or an old sheet or something and cover the back seat. . It’s not rocket science and I’ve never met a dog who doesn’t like a car ride!
We are after all being selected as sitters because the owners want someone to primarily look after their pets, having a great place to stay at no cost is the bonus.
@jennylb Other sitters have already nentioned several valid reasons for not taking dogs in their car - security issues, dirt, hair, rental car restrictions etc- but if you are OK with it- go ahead!
We just did a sit where we took a dog out with us, several times, to a local walk we knew and loved and the dog loved it too. This was an absolute exception and not required at all as there were lovely walks directly from the door. But it was our choice. (Also this dog does not shed hair and we didn’t go anywhere muddy which helped!)
My objection is when a host requires the dogs to be driven to a walking place, because there are no walks from the door, but does not provide a car or offer fuel money. That smacks of entitlement to me. If this is written in the listing I would not apply. But if it is announced only on arrival that’s tricky! It happened once, early on, we arrived at a sit and realised we’d not discussed walks and the 2 Vizlas needed driving 10 mins to a local Forest. Our car was full (we were on the road!) & at that time still a completely dog free zone. The HOs were first timers and honestly hadn’t thought if this, and we’d thought they were more rural, but they immediately put me on the insurance of one of their cars. If they had not been able to do that, for whatever reason, we’d have had a problem!
The housesit exchange is clear - pet & home care in exchange for accomodation. Any extra duties/costs need to be discussed and agreed. That includes use of sitters car for driving hosts dogs..
You’ve missed the whole point which is that many of us object to owners who expect sitters to take their dogs out for their walks in sitters’ cars without considering recompense for petrol or perhaps cleaning the car. I have mentioned this before but last Christmas, soon before I started a sit, it was mentioned I’d need to take their (large) dog in my car for his walks. The house was on a busy road with no pavements.
I have, on many occasions, taken dogs in my car to different places to explore but that’s been my decision to do so. There’s a big difference!
