Sit Cancellation Plan for Sitters

Just for general context: In various countries, “insurance” is highly regulated and to sell it, you have to be tested and licensed. It sounds like THS didn’t realize that when they wrote their original copy and have now updated to avoid being fined or otherwise punished by regulators. From the outside, there’s no way for us to tell whether internal policies or policies have changed, but it’s entirely plausible that they might’ve changed their copy just for the reason I mentioned, not necessarily because they changed anything else.

3 Likes

The problem always was that we only got to see a text on a THS website, never the real insurance policy.

Updated 11 March 2024
There is no mention of an insurance partner. Decisions are now at the sole discretion of THS.

*Are there circumstances where we will never pay under this Plan?

This Plan is offered at our sole discretion but in any event we will never pay Sitters under this Plan where:

  1. The Sitter initiates the Sit cancellation.
  2. The Sit cancellation is mutually agreed between the Pet Parent and the Sitter.
  3. The Sitter arranges Alternative Accommodation without incurring accommodation costs, such as accommodation provided by the Sitter’s family or friends.
  4. The Sitter has not incurred any financial loss as a result of the Sit cancellation.
  5. The Sitter had a reasonable option not to travel, which would have prevented incurring cost (such as refundable travel bookings, plans that could be amended)
  6. The Alternative Accommodation that the Sitter uses is further than 20 miles (32 kilometres) from the location of the original Sit.
  7. The Sitter fails to provide receipts detailing dates, per night cost of accommodation and expenses they have paid.
  8. For losses in excess of the Maximum Limit.
  9. When the Sit is cancelled due to a breach of Our Terms of Service or code of conduct by the Sitter.
  10. The Sitter has arranged a suitable alternative house Sit through Our platform
  11. When the Sit is cancelled due to regulations set by the government of any country (such as travel restrictions, enforced quarantining, area lockdowns).
  12. If Sitters, or anyone acting for Sitters makes, or attempts to commit fraud, such as a false or exaggerated claim, We will reject the payment request form and any subsequent payment request forms. We will notify the Sitter if We do this. Additionally ………
1 Like

This is the part that is different and concerning. I don’t know what kind of insurance I could possibly get that would cover alternative accommodations due to a sit being cancelled. That’s the whole point of the THS ‘plan’.

13 Likes

@systaran Sorry I don’t have the answers to that, I can only go on what Membership Services have shared with me. But they did say to tell members to reach directly out to them with any questions or concerns, so they will be happy to help.
You can also share any findings here :slight_smile:

I hate the wording on this. I’m imagining that the common reason for cancelations are a change in plans on the part of the pet owner. The sitter isn’t in any way initiating this, but when a petparent says, “I’m cancelling the sit because my dog’s cancer is back from remission and we want to spend all the quality time with him and postpone the trip” a sitter isn’t going to “disagree” with that.

The wording implies that a sitter must somehow “disagree” with the Petparent’s decision. Agreement here is irrelevant. If my flight is cancelled due to mechanical difficulties it’s not my call. How about:

The Sit cancellation was not initiatted solely by the Pet Parent.

5 Likes

This! I don’t want to be in a position and find out nope, we’re not paying your accomodations because you didn’t buy some non-existent insurance that we didn’t tell you, you needed to have when you paid us the extra money.

Also I don’t have a problem with whether it’s called a “guarrantee” or “assurance” or “insurance.” I just want to know that it exists if I need it and won’t turn out to be bait and switch.

On a positive note the plan appears to side with a sitter who leaves a sit because the premises are deemed to be Unliveable. And the terms provides a useful definition of “unliveable”

“we will never pay Pet Parents under this Plan for any of the following:

  1. A Sitter abandons the Sit because the premises are deemed to be Unliveable.”

“Unliveable” means a pet parents premise that fails to meet the requirements outlined in Our Terms of Service. These requirements include but are not limited to, a clean and hygienic living space, no third parties present, and no dangerous pets.“

5 Likes

The problem is the subjective nature of clean and hygienic.

1 Like

This is largely the same consdiotns as when it was run by a 3rd party - 24 hour notice, 14 day cancellation window, $150 and $1500 limits etc.
The difference now seems to be that it is soley run by THS so possibly self-funded. This may mean more payouts and if it means less payouts then THS cannot blame anyone else as it is solely at their discretion. So not paying will only create bad press for them.

Reason no 2 for non-payment is troublesome. If an HO lets the sitter know that something unexpected has happened as a result of which they can’t travel, or the pet has gotten very sick or died, etc etc, is the sitter supposed to DISAGREE with that, such that they can claim??

Hello @cawosey I just wanted to jump on here and reassure you and everyone reading this thread that it was just a formality change to the wording to make sure it was clear and compliant. The plan has not been taken in house and is still managed by the same external provider that it always has been.

@Twitcher These exceptions have always been in the plan T&C’s and the same external provider is still providing the plan. I just want to let you know to help ease as much worry as possible on this thread.

Membership Services have confirmed the above and said that if you have any concerns at all please reach out to them.

This :raised_hands:
I’m well versed in travel insurance and can’t think of a plan that would cover this because there’s no accommodation cost to prove to insurance as a loss.