This topic comes up again and again — and for good reason. Travelers report or experience listings where the host remained in the home during parts of the stay, had tenants in the property, added extra overlapping days etc etc — often without any prior notice and with complete disregard of the terms.
Some travelers are perfectly fine with this. Others find it an uncomfortable surprise.
Currently, only guests are screened, and the platform either don’t clearly define these terms enough or are completely overlooked when a listing is created — likely both.
Many hosts simply don’t see themselves as being “third parties”
Would it be possible to introduce a simple “Shared Accommodation” toggle, similar to Airbnb? It would allow travelers to filter listings according to their comfort level, while encouraging hosts to be significantly more transparent and also more timely with their travel plans from the outset. A small change with a big impact — clarity for everyone
That’s a valid concern — but the issue is, many are already doing this, whether intentionally or not. The problem isn’t necessarily bad intent, but a lack of clarity and enforcement. A tag would expose this and give travelers a chance to make informed choices.
Pretending the issue doesn’t exist doesn’t solve it.
I totally get where you’re coming from — but the reality is, many hosts don’t view themselves as “third parties,” and some travelers aren’t even aware of the rule either, even here in the forum. Clearly, what’s currently in place isn’t enough.
A tag wouldn’t permit the behavior — it would encourage clarity and accountability. It’s about revealing what’s already happening, not endorsing it.
And with far more listings than there are travelers, I’d absolutely welcome a tag that works both ways — so hosts can see up front that I don’t do sleepovers with strangers. Transparency works best when it goes both ways.
Hosts aren’t considered third parties for the purposes of overlaps at the start or end of their sits. It’s only during the main body of the sit when they’d be considered that.
If THS wanted to help with that, they could create a toggle or such that allowed hosts to indicate whether they need an overlap with a sitter. But THS is unlikely to do that, in favor of prospective hosts and sitters working out such details among themselves.
Yes, implementing such a feature would be relatively straightforward — and from both a security and liability standpoint, a prudent move for THS. It’s not uncommon for hosts to include overlap days within the official dates, effectively making it shared accommodations.
A tag would at least introduce some level of transparency while also offering THS a degree of protection in the event of non-compliant situations - particularly given that hosts are not subject to any screening.
If they wanted to add such functionality, technically, not hard. But THS fine print essentially makes them an introduction platform, without legal responsibilities if your hosts or sitters turn out to be X.
Wouldn’t know the full extent of their responsibility in such scenarios — think only their lawyers do. But legal is one thing; publicity and user trust are another, and those can, like everything else, change overnight.
By showing a tag for this @buttercup, THS would then be seen as approving this situation which violates their T & C. The T & C are in place for a specific reason and, in this case, to protect the privacy and security, of both members. How often do we tick a box agreeing to the T & C for other businesses etc. online without reading fully what we are agreeing to? It is our responsibility as adults to do this but we often don’t, me included. In the case of THS, we need to be selective in the sits we apply for. If I see a listing where it’s clear there is a 3rd party involved, I do report it to THS and, so far, the listings have been removed.
It would be good if the Trusted Times could be used to explain the importance of reading and adhering to the T & C and Code of Conduct where there are many new members rather than the “feel good” articles we have returned to receiving @Mark_B
Yes, the T&Cs are there for a reason, and I try to report all non-compliant listings too when I come across them. In some ways they already are - the fact that so many violate them and still remain active is, in itself, a kind of endorsement. While being selective helps, it only takes you so far — these breaches obviously aren’t always disclosed.
There have been repeated suggestions for a simple flagging function instead of going through the chatbot process — something that, to an extent, might help improve enforcement. Never read newsletters, so I wouldn’t know how widely they reach or what’s actively being done to reduce breaches during listing creation.
But there’s clearly a reason why similar platforms introduced tags like these in the first place. Pretending the issue doesn’t exist doesn’t solve it.
Unfortunately, THS has no serious competition. That means it’s got way more leeway than most businesses. If you take a look at threads, there are plenty of things that members have raised concerns and suggestions about, and yet THS has done little or nothing. And yet we’re all still members.
…I imagine at some point, standard taxi drivers also believed they had no real competition. But today — especially with online-based services — I doubt any good company with a long-term strategy still thinks it’s untouchable.
Not to downplay other concerns raised here, but the number of posts on this issue is significant — anyone can register, search the forum and see that.
Having THS employees active here is definitely a positive… but if a serious non-compliant situation were to make headlines, that same visibility could serve as evidence that THS was aware and deliberately looked the other way.
@buttercup I think its unlikely THS would act on a suggestion like this when there are so many other issues raised that they ignore.
And tbh I don’t think its really necessary.
If I see a listing that clearly mentions 3rd parties e.g tenants, lodgers, kids, grandma.. being present, or the host returning mid sit etc, I scroll on. Occasionally I report the listing but its a hassle to do that so I do agree with you a ‘flag it’ button would be good for such listings.
But for all the details of overlap at the beginning or end (which is allowed) i have always just discussed and clarified those details with the host in advance. Mostly that’s enough. We have had one or two awkward moments over the years when things obviously hadn’t been clarified quite enough but you learn from such experiences and do it differently the next time.
There is only so much hand holding THS can do before it becomes interference.
E.g the 5 application limit and the removal of the possibility to overlap sits have both been highly critised as over controlling and unnecessarily restrictive policies.
I think THS needs to do a better job of sending a series of reminders on every sit to both parties. “You have a sitter coming in two weeks. Reminder that there are to be no third parties (including you the host) during the entire duration of the sit”
Exactly — the “too much of a hassle” point is why a simple flagging option makes sense, and why enforcement gaps persist. Without it, things easily slip into a loosely self-regulated vacuum, where it’s everyone-for-themselves.
I wouldn’t call making travelers aware of whether they’ll be staying in shared spaces with strangers “handholding” — it’s a minimal standard of transparency.
I get that overlap restrictions may impact those using this “full-time” with tight logistics. But core terms and safeguards clearly aim to protect all users — not just the most active.
Ultimately, we’ll see how (or if) things evolve — hopefully through proactive measures and foresight, not fallout and after-the-fact damage control.
It would be a great risk for THS to allow shared accommodation, as so many things could happen.
The personal safety of the sitter, the safety of the home and pet, who is responsible if something happens with the home, pet or sitter, the handover, the basis for reviews.
If a button, the host should press one to confirm No third parties.
…that would be a solid start. I’m not sure what their internal reminder process looks like for hosts — but clearly, something’s slipping through the cracks.
Most people skim reviews and ignore the fine print — no one reads anymore — so anything implemented should to be front and center. Unmissable. Like a speeding ticket or jury duty
Already allowing it…But yes, there are indeed multiple valid safety concerns. A button for hosts to confirm “No third parties” - even better. Easy to implement too.
