Yes, very reasonable.
It is a disparity between advertised services and the actual responsibilities imposed on sitters.
While TrustedHousesitters promotes insurance coverage and veterinary support for its members, section 5.3.5 of the terms mandates sitters to cover veterinary expenses upfront and seek reimbursement from the Pet Parent. This places an undue burden on sitters, contradicting the core principle that owners bear responsibility for their property and should comply with local laws.
Local laws encompass a range of regulations, including animal licensing, breed-specific restrictions, and requirements for spaying/neutering and vaccinations. Itâs unjust to hold sitters accountable for the ownerâs failure to comply with these laws, particularly concerning elderly pets. Additionally, expecting sitters to assume responsibility for ownersâ preventive care and lifestyle management choices raises significant ethical concerns.
Veterinarians typically offer options for prior authorization and established payment procedures for owners. Aligning the terms with these industry practices would clarify financial responsibility, ensuring it remains with the owner and providing essential protection for sitters. Comparable practices should extend to services like plumbing and electrical work; as members reported in this thread and other threads. Thereâs a pressing need to address situations where owners neglect necessary property maintenance, leading to unforeseen costs for sitters. Iâve encountered instances where neglected maintenance resulted in expensive repairs, costs that should not be shouldered by the sitter.
Expecting sitters to enforce expense reimbursement based on diverse local laws is impractical and unfair. Sitters lack the expertise to navigate legal complexities and should not bear this responsibility. The companyâs role, as explicitly stated, should not involve creating legal complexities or contractual obligations between members.
Sitters are typically not local too to be physically present to resolve.
I advocate for terms and policies that protect all membersâ interests, prevent exploitation, and provide clarity on responsibilities. I wrote THS so that there is written notice of my rejection of these clauses.
2 Likes
I certainly agree that the sitters are not responsible for any kind of payment neither for the pets nor for repairs. However, any sitter is free to decline a sit if the information of the home owner isnât provided who will pay in case they are not online 24/7.
My vet always knows that sitters are going to care for our pets when we are away and that they will not have to pay the bill. Instead we will be sent the invoice to take care of it.
In my welcome guide I list two emergency contacts, who will pay for everything necessary in case the pet has to be taken to an emergency hospital or if any emergency concerning the house arises.
I also hand over a debit card to the sitters, which can be used to cover costs.
I gladly discuss this during a video call with potential sitters.
So as to avoid being made responsible for any kind of payment, the sitters should ask upfront how the home owner will handle this. You canât rely on THS for everything. A little common sense does help sometimes 
2 Likes
This is the companyâs terms.
I am aware of this, but this doesnât mean that using common sense is not necessary.
How many times have members here on the forum asked about sits, which went wrong, asked for advice how to deal with unpleasant situations? Most of these could have been avoided by asking the right questions beforehand and looking for red flags.
I rather try not to create a situation where I will have to deal with something that could have been avoided, no matter what the guidelines and T&C say.
By making sure that the home owner takes care of veterinary costs and repairs, the problem of being responsible and possibly not reimbursed, doesnât arise.
1 Like
I just added something to my profile, kind of states the obvious, but it might prompt hosts whose sits I apply for to double check theyâve actioned these points.
From now on, I am going to add questions relating to vet bills and authorisation to the list of questions I ask when having video calls.
- Communication is so important especially the welcome guide which we refer to regularly so would ask that this is up to date, completed in full, including contact details of the vet, pet insurance information, that payment arrangements have been made with the vet and they are aware that sitters have your permission to seek medical treatment for your pet in your absence. Although this is worse case scenario, itâs important to be prepared should this happen. *
Stop thinking itâs ok that a sitter pays ANY upfront costs, whether it be for VETS or HOUSE REPAIRS. Itâs the most ridiculous and dangerous situation to put a sitter in. There are many young sitters that can be taken advantage of. You should make sure that the HO has a credit card available for such emergencies by requiring that they sign an agreement that they do have available credit or funds for such emergencies. What is a sitter to do if a House Repair comes up and they are leaving the next day? Do you really expect them to stay, pay the cost and then beg for their money back from the HO? Or take the HO to court, having to travel back to that area again? You do not protect the sitter at all. You must be HO and not HSâs
1 Like
I think this would only be if the owner is not in cell range. If you are in contact with the HO they can call their vet and pay over the phone. Though it does post a problem if the HO is not reputable. I think THS should add that you can keep the pet if the owner doesnât pay you back. 
1 Like
You canât pay a vet over the phone in Sri Lanka for example (as we found out) so you need plan b & c too @AshleyShore - transferring funds into the sitters account or leaving proper petty cash would be two sensible options
4 Likes
This is only reasonable if the vet bill can be paid 2 weeks after its incurred. I canât imagine how difficult it would be to get reimbursed by a HO in another country 2 weeks after a cost has been incurred and satisfiedâŚThis is after the review window closes so it could not even be mentioned in a review if the PP does not comply. I believe in peopleâs good will and honesty but this puts the sitter in a really awkward position.
This is just a really odd requirement. Also of note, the Vet Advice Helpline is not available to us âBasicâ sitters.
2 Likes
@akqueen01 I think this requirement of THS (that sitters should pay upfront and await reimbursement) is absurd, unreasonable and unfair. It puts a lot of unnecessary pressure on a sitter. I, for one, will not take a sit where I am required to pay anything upfront. I will always clarify that before the sit starts as I would never want to find myself in the position of having a sick pet and no funds to pay for treatment. I am sure there are many other sitters who feel the same.
The PP should have plans A, B & C in place- unconnected to the sitter- to ensure their pets will always be cared for in the event of an emergancy. There should be no extra stress on the sitter who will already be stressed about caring for someone elses sick pet!
9 Likes
@Lokstar It is also unenforceable.
Discuss the issue with any HO during the video chat to ensure youâre on the same page about this.
6 Likes
Iâm thinking a good solution is for friends/family who agree to be emergency contacts are the people who pay at the point of treatment if no prepaid account can be set up. The HO is more likely to reimburse a friend or family member in a timely manner than the sitter. It also negates any issues of transferring funds/currency issues/fees etc. Or indeed any treatment dispute between HO and sitter.
9 Likes
Now THAT is an excellent idea!
1 Like
I feel it super strange that the sitter is expected to pay, its not logical to me. Itâs not my pet or house, why would I pay? Same if it was a sitter at my own home, I would never expect them to pay my vet bills or household upkeep. This should be changed in my opinion.
1 Like
Not only emergency vet fees, but the sitter is expected to pay any vet expense upfront:
5.3.5. pay any veterinary expenses up front and request the Pet Parent to reimburse you for all costs incurred
Having to pay for any vet fees upfront is putting quite the onus / financial responsibility on the sitter.
I agree as to having a discussion between HO and sitter regarding payment for vet care should be established. A sitter may not be able to afford vet care and a HO having an account established to pay vet costs certainly will take the financial burden off of the sitter.
5.3.6. immediately contact the Pet Parent in the event of any damage to property and get their approval for repair. If, in the event of an emergency, you are unable to contact the Pet Parent, you will pay for the repair of any damage caused, and request the Pet Parent reimburse you for all costs incurred (provided you have not caused the damage yourself);
If I damaged a HOâs property, I would pay and not expect to be reimbursed.
However, if the HOâs property is damaged beyond my control and I am expected to pay, I would not be happy about itâparticularly if it is an astronomical amount.
1 Like
This is a point I struggle with as well as a HO. My regular vet will set up an account where expenses will be billed to our card. However, our regular vet has limited hours. There is a 24/7 urgent care nearby but they will not set up accounts, nor will they provide treatment without a substantial deposit. I would not want to put a Sitter in any position where they had to pay upfront as that is grossly unfair.
If we are travelling with full cell service it isnât a big problem as we can always call the vet with payment information.
The problem is when we travel places with unreliable service. We have one such sit planned in November. I am considering leaving a credit card with my friend (emergency contact) who can use it to pay if we are unreachable. Or option 2 is just leave the card in the home and Sitters can grab them in case of emergency.
It would be easier if all vets let you set up an account with payment information on file already!
5 Likes
@sharondc TBH I absolutely disagree with the THS policy that a sitter should pay Vet bills upfront and ask for reimbursement! That is a huge burden of responsibility to place on a sitter and a whole lot of extra stress. This theme has come up on several threads and Iâve commented there too.
My position is that I would refuse any, and all, upfront payments for Vet care, house maintenance, emergancies or any other costs that would leave me out of pocket. I donât care what THS stipulates- I refuse to take that clause seriously- it is totally unfair. I believe the HO is entirely responsible for organising payments in whatever way is manageable for them.
@Felinelover Your attitude is absolutely correct and very reassuring to read. This is what I expect from all HOs.
11 Likes
I have a friend whose dog needed emergency care. The initial cost estimate was $14K and that was just to diagnose what was wrong. Fortunately the dog recovered but the total treatment was over $20K. They would not begin treatment without a 50% deposit - so $7k up front!!
It is completely unreasonable to expect a sitter to pay that amount!
13 Likes
I totally agree with you, i didnât realise that sitters were expected to pay a vets bill up front, weâve been fortunate that in nearly 40 sits weâve never had to use a vet but the stress and anxiety it would cause me worrying about not getting reimbursed sends my stress levels through the roof! This will definitely be on my list of things to discuss the next time we look for a sit.
3 Likes