I insist, “allowed” does not mean “compulsory” but I would like to add that, by default, in every regulation, “not forbidden” means “allowed”.
So innumerable pets, not dedicated room, gardening tasks, no pool, no toaster… is allowed.
So the reason
Is not to force sitters to accept them but to regulate the general use of cameras. Cameras are forbidden. There’s a specific term for that because of the prohibition, and then the conditions of the use of cameras are described in detail. Yes, you can have inside cameras, it is your house, but you have to switch them off when you have a sitter, you don’t have to switch off external cameras but you have to inform sitters where they are and you have to include them in your listing. You don’t have to include in your listing every single appliance that you have. Some owners only say “high speed wi-fi “ in their list of amenities. They are not forced to include the toaster but the sitter is not forced to use it. Maybe that’s why you’re not forced to mention it. While if the camera (any camera) is activated there’s no choice for the sitter.
Upfront re: ?
If you mean upfront as in honest about themselves, their availability, experience, etc. I agree 100%.
If you mean upfront as in acceptance of cameras, I can pretty much guarantee that no one likes them, though some are willing to put up with them.
Just because a potential sitter doesn’t bring up the camera issue does not mean that you don’t have a responsibility to disclose your use of one. In this case, omission of that fact surreptitiously sidles in and , in a sense, you’re lying about your home and conditions.
We don’t have them at our house, other than the front door Ring doorbell, but I don’t understand the aversion to outdoor cameras. Unless you are doing something that you shouldn’t be doing, who cares?
Get the Ring doorbell if you want to, good grief its your home. Why would anyone worry about being seen coming and going? We love our Ring doorbell, its a wonderful way to make sure of whom you are opening the door to, when deliveries are dropped off, and I can talk to someone at the front door when I am out back in my studio.
I think what she is saying is if you are opposed to exterior cameras state that in your profile. HOs can invite sitters to apply also. Plus why not save everyone time by stating such up front?
I feel like some HOs might be put off by a sitter who lists in their profile the things they don’t accept in sits. It might make the sitter look difficult – even to an HO whose sit doesn’t include any of the things the sitters doesn’t accept – rather than making the sitter look like they’re trying to be considerate by saving other homeowners time.
Not in my town they aren’t. I’m in Australia, and its not a common practice.
To me the first statement meant external cameras, meaning cctv, were everywhere. And then you deny it. I’m sorry if I misunderstood.
I can definitely understand why people would have exterior cameras around their property. It’s a derrent if nothing else. One which we use.
Am I wrong that the current THS policy is simply: No internal cameras full stop and outdoor cameras, including “Ring” type doorbell cameras, backyard, garden, etc must be mentioned in listing? Is this not the case? If this is the case, then no need for all the judgement and defensiveness on either side. If it is the case that outdoor cameras can be mentioned only in the welcome guide, that should change, and/or sitters who have feelings about this need to ask before accepting the sit.
But looking at this from the point of view of someone who sits and hosts, doesn’t have internal or external cameras, and doesn’t care much about what hosts have if I want the sit, and who has never felt “monitored” by anyone’s garden or backyard cam, I find some of the comments on both sides here judgegy.
I don’t have any personal external cameras. But I live in an apartment building where we don’t have a locked a room for packages. Packages go on a big table. So if you get an alert on your phone from the shipper that your package has arrived, it’s wise to get down there ASAP. We have a worker take packages up to our doors on weekdays. This system isn’t full proof as packages have gotten pinched. However, there is a camera, visibly facing the table. That camera is a deterrent. In some of the homes I’ve sat, there is a camera on the porch that is there to prevent “porch bandits.” Personally, if I was a sitter, and I got a call from the host that the new laptop arrived could I please take it in from the porch, and it wasn’t on the porch, I’d be grateful for the camera that could prove I didn’t take it.
It deters people illegally parking.
Even though the house is occupied burglars still break in to houses. They might think twice if they notice cctv.
Taking things from the garden by opportune thieves.
In short, just making my property less vulnerable.
To me, exterior cameras have nothing to do with the people in the house. More to do with deterring criminals from entering. I’m not interested what my family and friends do while I’m not there.