To think this house sitter was bloody cheeky?

[Littlefluffyclouds81]

My DM recently got a house sitter for 10 days whilst we all went on holiday. She had used her once before and all seemed fine. She seemed very professional - took detailed information about all the animals, signed contracts, she is fully insured etc.

She was supposed to sleep at my DM's house each night, although my DM was aware that she would need to pop back here and there to exercise her own dogs (she lives with her parents).

She was paid over £600, and for that she had to look after 2 dogs and feed a cat. There are also 2 horses at my mum's, my mum's horse who is a big cob, and my daughter's pony. She wasn't expected to do anything with the horses.

While we were away the house sitter emailed to ask if it would be ok if her partner's kids came to meet the horses. My DM said that was fine. When we got back, my mum had a good chat with her and the house sitter said that the kids had come over and groomed my mum's horse, but not my daughter's pony because she was grumpy (she is grumpy).

I was the first to go into the tack room, and noticed that the bridles weren't in the right place. I didn't really think anything of it. But today my DM said that there is grease on the bottom of her saddle, from where the saddle pad hasn't been put on properly and it has rubbed the horse, which she wouldn't do. Also her bridle had been done up all wrong. The stirrups on both saddles were at different lengths to how they'd been left by Us. She suspected that the house sitter had taken the kids riding on our horses. This was confirmed when she went for a ride around the village today and a neighbour (who has booked the same house sitter) said that the house sitter had emailed a picture with the kid sat on her horse!

Not only is riding someone's horses without their permission incredibly rude, it is also a really stupid thing to do. She knew nothing about our horses, they could have had any kind of quirks, and putting 2 kids on them (when she doesn't appear to know much about horses herself) was just bloody dangerous.

Not only that, but my DM said there's no way that the bed was slept in for 10 nights, so she suspects that the house sitter had left the dogs overnight which she wasn't supposed to do.

WWYD? I absolutely think that something should be said to the house sitter, but my DM is veering towards leaving it, and just locking the tack room if she uses her again! She was paid a lot of money, and in my opinion, took the piss.

Reveal what about the DP in the photos wearing OP's mums riding gear. I think that's fairly clear line crossing right there

reveal, she told the OP's mum that the children came over and just groomed one of the horses.

That was a downright lie, not thoughtlessness.

I'm not horsey, never ridden or had any experience with horses. The closest I've got to a horse is giving one a gentle pat over a fence. But I know they are big, powerful, sensitive animals that should be treated with respect and care. As any animal should be. A stranger treating them like they're a fairground attraction is awful and I can't understand why some posters aren't getting that. They aren't toys.

That is unacceptable of the house sitter, and blooming dangerous. I woukd be directly contacting her about this and never use her again. Whey would you, if she has behaved in this manner, totally unreliable.

I am not horsey too, but if anything happened whilst the children were on the horse, than op DM would be liable and have that on her conscience. The horse could have become spooked or bolted, and they kids on them could have been fatally injured. As well as being out of order to do this without asking.

Yes I do agree she was being deceptive by not telling her mum she had ridden one of them. I am also surprised by the riding clothes although I couldn't find that bit on the thread.
I thought it was the child she put on the horse? Was she leading it? Perhaps she just thought that a nice horsey photo in a bit of riding gear would be OK. I haven't read anywhere she gone for a full hack with the child.

But I do think that if you've been left in charge of the house with all theprivate stuff, personal letters etc, two dogs and a cat you tend to think the person who's employed you would trust your judgement.

Send this article to your mum, might help her find a more appropriate and professional not to mention cheaper sitter
www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/722510/The-Sophie-Butler-report-Finding-a-house-sitter.html

Reveal, OP's post of Sun 19-Jun-16 01:18:07

Fucking hell! I just looked her up on Facebook, and there, clear as day, is a photo of both of our horses, with the house sitter leading the pony, in our ménage.

my daughter's pony looks very unhappy, with the kid wearing my daughter's hat and back protector. And my mum's horse, with HER FUCKING PARTNER sat on him, wearing all my mum's stuff.

Wow op i don't have horses yet i'm angry! How dare she!
Good on your mom! Though i'd be asking for my money back too, cheeky cow!
Absolute disgrace.
She's 'horsey' yet allows people to ride others horses
I'd be leaving bad reviews also, to warn other people.
I don't think it's classed as harassment is it? If your simply describing your ( extremely poor) experience?
Ignore some people on here.
It is not ott to be angry at unknown people riding your horses.
It's downright stupid.

leaving bad reviews is not classed as harassment otherwise Trip Advisor would be closed down.
But contacting people privately through FB or any other means of communication and telling them COULD be. If someone sees a bad review cos they've looked someone up, that's fine. Getting a message from someone warning you not to use them could be seen as against the law.

But I do think that if you've been left in charge of the house with all theprivate stuff, personal letters etc, two dogs and a cat you tend to think the person who's employed you would trust your judgement.

I had a pony who seemed perfectly calm and lovely. But when we used to reach the bottom of our field I had to turn her to the right to walk back up. If we turned left she would bolt. No idea why. But that's something that you would get a nasty shock with if you rode her by stealth.

I was 8/9 and loved it when she bolted, but it scared the living day lights out of my mum

You arent legally entitled to get any of the £600 back unless you can prove she didn't do what you paid her for. Someones opinion of how used a bed sheet is, does not constitute enough proof.

It's possible she thought she had asked permission when she emailed you. It again comes to opinion as to what riding a horse means and a non horsey person might consider sitting on the horse for a photo exactly what she had permission for.

The op has to take responsibility, the house sitter was looking after a house that had horses even though she wasn't required to do much to them, I assume she was still responsible for them. So why weren't the horses included in the contract? Why wasn't it specified that the horses were NOT to have anyone sitting on them? A horsey person who knows this is dangerous should have given all this detail to the house sitter in advance. Permission was even flagged up in an email and I assume the op still didn't specify what wasn't allowed. Horses are not trivial things and the op should have provided more detail to the house sitter. In fact had one of the children been injured by these horses from a legal perspective the home owner would have been liable.

Whilst the house sitter might have been ignorant the op is responsible.

Nonsense peachpudding. The house sitter knew it was wrong because she lied about having done it, by only saying the children had groomed one of the ponies.

peachpudding no. If you have been paid to house sit and that doesn't include the horses, you dont ride them any more than you would drive their car.

And sitting a heavy adult on a horse is asking for trouble. It could have been on rest.
Anyone competent to look after a dog should know better than this.

The horses were included in the contract, but didn't need any stable care or feeding. Keeping an eye on them was part of the deal.

She must be monumentally thick to have done such a stupid thing, lied about it to you and then posting the proof on Facebook. What a dickhead.

What did she say when your mum challenged her?

Peach, what absolute nonsense!
You don't give tacit permission by failing to specify they can't do someone.

I'm sure OPs mum didn't specify the house sitter couldn't flog the telly on eBay. If she came home to find that he happened, they wouldn't be partially responsible for failing to remind her not to at the same time as telling her she was allowed to watch it.

I'd have print screen shots of those photos by now.

I've just sent her a ranty message on Facebook, and one to her boyfriend too.

She didn't really say much to my mum, what could she say? She said that she 'used her judgement' as she trusted the horses! It's unbelievable.

She has also today told the other person that she was supposed to be house sitting for that my mum had given her and her boyfriend permission to ride her horse! Which is a complete, outright lie. Luckily the woman knows my mum well so doesn't believe it for a second.

What the house sitter felt after the fact does not mean she is responsible. I am not saying she was not 'cheeky' or morally wrong but there is a legal responsibility for the homeowner to spell out such important details about living animals she was being paid to look after, especially when she requested and was given permission to bring her family around to see them.

Imagine it was a male house sitter and he was given permission to bring his friends around to look at the sports car. They take the car out of the garage to get a better picture of it, sit in the seats, adjust the seat belts etc would you say that was wrong? If the handbrake on the car went and it it rolled into one of the visitors it would be the home owners responsibility.

The home owner should have said, no sitting, petting, feeding or whatever. The op said the horses were in the contract so it should have been spelled out bringing family around to see the horses does not mean you can touch the horses.

In her head she might have thought she had permission, thats why you have to specify these things. That's what a contract is for.

Perhaps she just thought that a nice horsey photo in a bit of riding gear would be OK. I haven't read anywhere she gone for a full hack with the child.

Then she thought very wrong indeed. And it matters not a jot whether they just sat on them or went for a 'full hack'.

'a nice horsey photo' could easily have turned into a horror show if something had spooked one or both of the horses. They're animals and therefore by definition unpredictable; unless you're with someone who knows them and their habits/foibles/likes and dislikes, you don't tack them up and sit on them/sit little kids on them. Even if you're not a horse person, is it really that hard to get your head round that idea?

OP, I hope you and your mum have told her to take the photo off her Facebook page? For the rest, I'd rely on word of mouth to warn people off using her; it seems to be working so far with your mum's friend.

No, that's not how it works. You do not assume you have permission to ride horses unless you are told not to. It's the other way around.

Imagine it was a male house sitter and he was given permission to bring his friends around to look at the sports car.

The key words here are 'look at', are they not?

And why does it have to be a male housesitter, as an aside?

Your argument is laughable. You don't have tacit permission to sit in a car if someone's told you you can look at it. Neither do you have tacit permission to (wrongly) tack up, lead and ride other people's horses when you've been told 'make sure they're upright once a day.'

No they didn't go out for a hack, as far as I know. They didn't need to, as there is a menage right next to the stables. There are photos of our horses being ridden around there, including her boyfriend and his kid riding the same horse at the same time. Incredibly stupid, and dangerous.