I’m interested what would need to happen to qualify the use of that word?
If an animal is left in a state where it is barking and crying non-stop at the top of their voice for hours, non-stop, do you think they are kept at a good state? Are they being taken care for? Are they not showing distress?
What would then constitute abuse?
I mentioned and emphasized that my dog has anxiety issues and that he simply cannot be left alone for long periods. This is also not the first sitter through THS. I make this very clear and I ask specifically (more than once): “do you think this will be ok? Do you think you can handle that restriction?”. I’m aware it’s not for everyone but nobody is forcing anyone to take sits.
Sadly if the responses in this thread are representative of Sitters sentiments I can see that for most sitters, if they deem that in hindsight the agreement (or transaction?) between the sitter and home owner is not fair to the side of the sitter, then while it’s not ok to break that agreement, but it’s also not the end of the world.
I guess that’s already an important lesson.
Regarding the use of the word “abuse” I replied above. Feel free to add to the thread there.
Thank you Colin, for your response.
I agree with the above comment that your situation does not seem an appropriate fit for an unpaid house sitter. whether someone is coming into town to visit, or lives in the same community and needs the space for whatever reason, people need to be able to leave to explore, run errands, etc. Plus, you should have the grace to allow the sitter to run a little over the discussed time frame once or twice- who knows what happened. Maybe there was traffic. Maybe the restaurant was slow. Maybe they got caught up for a minute enjoying the scenery and lost track of time briefly. leaving the dog for a few hours on a couple of occasions should be a totally reasonable expectation on the part of the sitter. It sounds like you were clear on your expectations up front, but they don’t sound realistic or fair for the THS situation. Honestly, I have had a couple of very needy sets in a row (which to be fair were not communicated until I was at the house), but I really wish more homeowners would consider whether or not it is fair to ask someone to watch your pet for free. You should sincerely consider boarding your pet or paying someone reasonably for the expectation that they will be around full-time.
Hi Marion,
First, thank you for replying. What I shared here in this forum is not what I would have written in a public review. In my pov, if you know a dog has anxiety issues and cannot be left alone for long periods except on occasion. Meaning, this was communicated to you in a clear and understandable way, and you are doing it - you are intentionally causing the dog harm. I don’t want to bicker here where this is abuse or not. My point is I don’t want sitters who will say they do one thing and end up doing other.
No one said anything about not leaving the property. They can take my dog outside and thankfully I live in a city that is very much dog friendly. Is it an ideal setup for a tourist - probably not, but I’m sure some people can make it work and enjoy it very much.
In any case - I think your bottom line - and I’m getting this from other responses too, I can’t trust sitters to follow my guidelines. And if I’m using the website I have to take into account that this will happen again.
Bummer.
Really??!!!
You can read intentions now! I can’t, I can only speculate. But I would bet your sitter was just experiencing life as it comes ( traffic, delays, other issues, just enjoyment …)
As you chose to word the heading of this thread, you don’t even have proof that they were out for more than 3 hours on occasion as you asked, let alone that they intended to harm your dog.
People here have advised you against mentioning this in your review but I just wish future sitters could know how you feel about this it would not be bad for you or your dog either, it would just help you find a good match. And I honestly think there may be one, even here in THS. We are all different.
@absw11 Just trying to understand the logic here. You’ve said the dog is in distress whenever it’s left alone. But you’ve also said it’s okay to leave the dog for 3 hours. So, three hours is acceptable, but somehow at the three hour mark it becomes abuse?
Yes, the sitter should have stuck with the agreed 3 hours, but a little leeway there seems reasonable since things can come up that may cause a delay. You are just estimating that it was approximately 4 hours twice during the sit. I don’t see how that would be considered abuse. It’s a pretty big jump from completely fine to abuse in an hour.
But is it not exactly the same if left alone in this state for 3 hours?
Everything was mentioned in the listing and also during our conversations prior to agreeing to the sit.
I think what is “equitable and fair” for one person might not be for another.
No one is forcing sitters to accept “unfair terms”. They can simply say - “this doesn’t work for me, thanks”.
Everything was mentioned and discussed and agreed upon before agreeing to the sit so I don’t see how fairness come play here, honestly.
Hi Nagy26, not everything can be solved with training. Training is not some magic term you can throw into the conversation to absolve yourself from putting an animal in distress.
Even though, we’ve tried multiple training and it failed - that’s not the point. If you agree to a sit, where it is mentioned to you that you will be guarding a dog that has anxiety issues and due to that cannot be left alone for long periods of time - it becomes your responsibility to take that into account. You cannot just leave the dog for himself for hours (after you agreed not to do so knowing it would cause them distress) and just say “it’s the owner’s fault for not training them”.
As others have pointed out, your dog sounds like too high maintenance for an unpaid sitter. Getting a paid sitter for a dog with these special needs sounds a more fair and realistic approach for all involved, including your neighbour who has to listen to the dog crying.
It wasn’t hours. It was possibly an hour longer than you approved and you don’t even know that for sure.
With respect @absw11, you don’t know for sure (and cannot prove) that your dog was left for 4 hours, after you’d specifically limited sitter absences to 3. Your sitter has refuted this occurred. As for the neighbour, 3 hours can seem like an eternity when a dog is barking incessently, howling and whining, and unless he timed it from the first bark, how can he possibly be so precise?
I have to agree with other posters and can only repeat that it’s necessary to be very clear about what actually happens when your dog is left alone, if you list other sits. Stating your dog has ‘anxiety issues’ is simply not enough, you should state how that manifests and maybe even mention that this has caused complaints in the past from the neighbour in the apartment below.
You are deflecting from my question. My dog is 10 years old, how he was raised is not something that can be changed. Whether or not he suffer when we’re away, is something that can be controlled by having someone with him when we are not there.
So knowing all of this when you take a sit, and still doing it - you are saying on your account of things if I understand correctly - this is not abuse. correct?
No, this was not animal abuse. (But I feel sorry for your neighbour.)
Dogs do not have watches.
@absw11
Best thing here is eat humble pie and make a retreat.
Abuse is a strong term and should not be used in a situation like this.
Your argument is based on mere presumptions.
Me training my dog properly or not, and my dog being left themselves for hours are two separate events in time. One action does not justify the other.
Edited for clarity
Just to remind you of our respect and kindness guidelines. Please be thoughtful and considerate in your replies.
Thank you.
Don’t get me wrong. I completely agree that both sides should keep their part of the agreement. I also think that it is up for both parties to decide what’s fair for them. If it works for both parties. Fine.
What I am trying to say is that even you @absw11 admit you have no evidence and, from what you say, the sitter may have kept their part of the agreement. It’s your own words
Could be 20:20, 20:30 if we accept the neibourg is accurate
And
Could mean 23.30, 23.45, which could add up to a total of 3 hours approximately, twice.
Thus could mean that, for the rest of the sitting, the sitter has not even left the premises. If you assume that the barking means they are out, it stands to reason that no barking means they are in.
From that, to intentionally causing harm, there’s a huge jump, as @systaran said.
you should state how that manifests and maybe even mention that this has caused complaints in the past from the neighbour in the apartment below.
It was mentioned to the sitter prior to the sit.