Not so Trusted Housesitters
In the name of democracy, justice, and everything fluffy and nice I am starting a segment that focuses on investigating corruption through personal experiences.
Moral behaviour and ethics have always been an important aspect of my life. But the juxtaposition of behaving properly vs hurting people’s feelings or constantly feeling like an outsider - because I couldn't conform to rules set out by society - I took my time to think over just how I want to present sensitive information. I think I have it more or less figured out now. :)
As a natural people pleaser, I went back and forth on thinking that it may be best to let things work themselves out rather than point fingers, but at the end of the day, while letting things work themselves out we must also be true to our self and our purpose.
It was a conversation in Bali that I had with someone who made a quick analysis of me (which I love btw, as long as it’s constructive), she said “you like to think about ethics.”
And it’s true, I do, but what’s more, prior to that conversation these thoughts consumed me and I imagined that they were the most important thing in the world. Things suddenly came into perspective. I like to think about and talk about ethics because it’s my calling to address issues in society that drive immoral behaviour.
Essentially this is what the Sherlock Me segment is about. Investigating corruption. Analyzing systems and structures that make our world what it is. Because I live in North America I am most interested in investigating what occurs right here under our noses, where everything is made to look pretty on the surface.
It is the powerful companies and individuals that should be directed to do the proverbial right thing first. It is one of those cases where we must start from the top, and the layers below will fall in place.
While the TrustedHousesitters inquiry is a personal matter as well as one that is in the public interest, after working in journalism for years I have come to the conclusion that everything is personal.
It personally hurts me to see people starving or animals abused, or corrupt behaviour that seems to take place everywhere just as it personally hurts me when someone personally insults me.
A journalist doesn't really have a set of rules they must follow because that is the nature of the profession.
So for better or for worse we must judge ourselves, discipline ourselves, and accept the responsibility that comes with it. A simple rule is to ask ourselves if we’d be ok with someone doing the same to us or our loved ones.
Long story short, this is how I settled on blogging about personal experience as a form of investigation. It’s difficult to open yourself up to criticism, while disclosing very personal details, so be kind.
TrustedHousesitters is a prime example of what not to do if you are community building tech app. While some of their tactics will and do work, the karmic repercussions of this behaviour are troubling. A dishonest marketing machine that’s gaming Google to constantly have their website results show up at the very top is how they initially get the unsuspecting consumers.
We all want to optimize our time.
We all want to believe that bad things don’t happen.
And we all associate animals with kittens, butterflies, and everything nice (well the animal lovers do at least).
Most importantly many house sitters may not speak English well or at all, which puts them in a weak position. And these are exactly the sort of people who choose to pet sit or house sit, due to a lack of other options, because they do not have the financial means, but want to travel.
Naturally this creates inequality, which is further exacerbated by an internal structure of a very shady organization working to increase their bottom line under the veil of justice. Anyway you get the drift, watch this video for my personal experience with the tech app and conclusions to follow:
Once I started investigating the company I found that they attempted to absolve themselves from any and all responsibility essentially making the hosts, sitters, and the insurance company they are working with be responsible for anything and everything that may occur during an assigned pet sit. Furthermore the incremental amount of money that they take from sitters and hosts isn’t enough to take the company to court, unless a class-action suit is organized.
The company creates the illusion of it’s own justice by having customer service workers act as judges. In the meantime due to the structure of the company, the dire need to hold onto potential hosts, the decisions in case of any dispute will always pander to the host. This opens up the door to discrimination, emotional abuse, et cetera. It has even been suggested by a number of websites that babysitters should voluntarily undergo a criminal check. An idiotic idea to say the least.
And the saddest part is that some sitters may agree, because they’ve been living in such poverty stricken conditions that they have no more self-respect left. Ironically the criminals won’t agree to a self-imposed criminal check and may actually get the idea to organize themselves to take advantage of the holes in the system.
Bravo TrustedHousesitters!
On the bright side there are still plenty of house sitting website that have a soul :)
Here is a good website I found reviewing them.
As promised on my YouTube channel I contacted the TrustedHousesitters with the link to my video to let them know about the report. A customer rep responded very quickly, perhaps too quickly, as they completely missed the point of my video / email.
Without a doubt a customer rep cannot play a judge, as you’ll see responses like the one you can read below:
What I wrote:
They called my email and video a complaint rather than what it actually is. The audacity to think that I would want anything to do with the website now is LAMOOO. Naturally an apology and a refund would not be enough at this point, and that is the best one can expect from a company of this stature.
It appears the customer rep has not read the agreement of their employer as they insisted I was in the ‘wrong’ due to their own interpretation (more on this below) which lacked logical sense and did not correspond with the actual contract a.k.a. the facts.
Ironically the ‘interpretation’ implies that the customer rep has the chat thread which they insisted I send over to them to look at for resolving harassment allegations. Again not only are they lying by default at this point, but also missing the fact that I mentioned in the video that the company has the full convo thread as the previous customer rep fessed up to that fact.
Lastly, I have to now view this last email as harassment as well, as I have clearly stated my position in the video, which is that I do not consider customer reps qualified to deal with issues of this sort. Seems the rep has proven me right with their response.
And spending more time on correspondence would be self-abuse. :)
If a company has made the same mistake not once, but twice, it can no longer be called a mistake, but a premeditated act. Unless you plan to take it up a notch, distancing yourself from them and ignoring all further harassment is best.
Playground rules apply here, eventually even the biggest bullies give up or get meaner (if they get meaner get authorities involved). As the Half the Clothes blog says “they are digging their own grave” and I am far too busy telling stories.
By:
✘
𝓛𝓸𝓿𝓮,
𝓐𝓙☙
