As I sitter I am never ‘requesting accommodation’ when I apply for sits.
Such a perspective would only come from a HO.
HOs request the service of sitters.
They set the dates, the rules and obligations of sitters and then initiate a sit by posting a listing describing their expectations and requirements.
I’m yet to see posts from sitters requesting accommodation in their chosen location and for their chosen dates on THS, maybe you could direct me to these.
Expecting a sitter to pay for a rental car for several weeks or months in order to deal with the logistics of caring for a HOs remote property and pets is by no means mutually beneficial.
Nobody is expecting you or any sitter to. Listings clearly state if it is accessible with public transport or if a car is required. If the later then it is probably best suited to those of us that sit with our own vehicles or those with the funds and willingness to rent. If I am taking a non-sit holiday I will decide if it is somewhere that needs a car or not and if the cost to rent is worth it to me. If not I will do a city break where it is not needed.
There are plenty of sits that are suited to those without their own transport and many a time I look at those and don’t apply as 1. They are generally very popular and go quickly. 2. I can just take a city break without sitting. We only sit dogs and generally for the walking exercise it gives us so for that we go rural. 3. It leaves those sits for those that don’t have transport.
The choices are there to be made on both sides and possibly rural sits without a car may be harder to fill but ultimately we are all just looking for the ‘right’ fit. Choose what works for you.
I have seen numerous listings in incredibly remote locations where the
HO is clearly not looking for a ‘local’ sitter or expecting to receive an application from one.
HOs acknowledge that sitter will not likely be able to use sitter’s own vehicle and the HO explicitly states that the sitter will need to rent a vehicle.
In addition I have received several invitations for lengthy (all over a month) remote sits from HOs on different continents that clearly acknowledge I would not be able to use my own vehicle or theirs (for whatever unexplained reason) and I would therefore need to rent a car in order to care for their home and pets. I don’t even reply to them - I just laugh to myself and roll my eyes at the expectations some people have others.
All I can say is thank goodness for the truly considerate HOs that value and appreciate the service provided by good sitters.
I am a sitter, too. As a sitter, I view this as a mutually-beneficial even exchange. Same as I do as a homeowner.
And yes, it’s not the most typical way such exchanges happen, but sitters do reach out to homeowners. I’ve personally had multiple sitters contact me to say they can’t do a particular sit but would love to do one in future. Some guy in Florida did that literally yesterday. My last sitter contacted me to ask whether we had any travel plans sometime around mid-September, when she and her husband are hoping to get into town.
I do not consider that “requesting accommodation”. I consider it offering to make a mutually beneficial even exchange if my own travel plans align with theirs.
It’s mutually beneficial if the sitter wants to spend weeks or months in a remote location and can save a ton of money in lodging/restaurant food costs – maybe thousands – and the HO needs a sitter. If a sitter doesn’t want to spend weeks or months renting a car, they aren’t “expected” to. They can just skip that sit. Someone else may jump at it because to them, it feels mutually beneficial.
Yeah - I didn’t think there were listings made by sitters on THS ‘requesting accommodation’ at specific locations for particular dates chosen by the sitter.
The only listings displayed on THS are made by HOs requesting the service of sitters!
Except when sitter makes it explicitly clear that having a rental car is necessary!
And I don’t know what lodging and restaurant costs a sitter is supposedly ‘saving’ on by caring for someone’s pets in the HO’s own remote home.
This discussion is regarding the actual financial outlay expected of sitters by some HOs in order to care for the HO’s home and pets and how such expectations are not mutually beneficial.
This is not a discussion about hypothetical ’savings’ that could be made by sitters whilst caring for a HO’s home and pets.
But I seriously can’t believe people think sitters are now going to have to grateful to HOs for ‘saving’ them thousands in lodging and restaurant costs whilst caring for their home and pets!
I get the feeling we’re having two different conversations here…they’re saving whatever they’d have to pay for lodging and restaurant food to be staying in the area, of course.
I’m starting to feel like we’re being trolled. No one except you has mentioned EITHER PARTY being expected to be grateful to the other. It’s an even exchange. Both parties should leave feeling the exchange was a positive for them.
It would be pretty inefficient otherwise. Like, HO would go searching for someone who wanted to be in Ann Arbor, MI, from August 10-19th and is willing to care for three dogs, one of whom needs daily subcutaneous injections? Lol…
If a home is not accessible without a car, then apply for it or not based on whether a car is offered or whether you have one or don’t mind renting or figuring out an alternative.
No need to feel put out if a sit doesn’t match your circumstances. Just skip it.
Personally, I can afford to rent cars and sometimes do and sometimes not. It’s just a question of what’s worthwhile to me.
For hosts, it’s also a question of whether offering a car is worthwhile to them or not. It doesn’t matter whether anyone else agrees with their decision — for whatever reason. People are entitled to decide how to share their belongings or not.
For staying in the area? Whilst having to look after a strangers home and care for their pets for free?
You obviously view sitters motivations for sitting simply as a chance for them to have a vacation somewhere different and get free accommodation. That might be your approach to sitting but it certainly isn’t mine or most other sitters.
Just a quick reminder about our Community Guidelines around kindness and respect. It’s important to remember that Owners and Sitters will have different views and opinions but these should be discussed respectfully.
We understand that people will disagree on some things, but we ask that you do so without targeting anyone, or making assumptions about them or their life. If you feel like you can’t do that, we recommend finding another conversation to take part in.
I think you might be surprised how many sitters apply for a sit because that sit to them looks like a cool place to spend whatever length of time, but let’s drill down: what is your approach to sitting?
For the sake of discussion: It doesn’t matter if a host did or didn’t request sitting. Even if they did, they still get to decide whether or not to offer a car. For some sitters, that might be a dealbreaker, but of course they’re not obligated to accept a sit.
With attempts at matching, there’s no assumed right to borrow a car, even if the host initiated a request for sitting. If that were a right, it would’ve been part of THS terms and it’s clearly not.
Some hosts with hard to reach sits might end up offering a car, but some might simply decide that it’s not worthwhile and instead arrange alternate care.
@LiamSits
I believe we have all understood that you have your strong views on the possibility of using the owner’s car or not. It’s fine that you have these ideas, but please don’t berate the home owners who don’t want to loan their vehicle, or the sitters that are perfectly fine with this decision.
Have you ever considered that the homeowners might need their only vehicle to go on their trip with?
