Please sign this petition to support government regulation of digital dog sitting platforms like Rover.com.

Of course, the information in this petition we believe to be accurate and created  to the best of our knowledge and our/or others experiences, opinions and accounts concerning Rover.com. 

What we want:

Rover and other pet sitting platforms must be regulated to make sure our pets are safe, pet sitters are vetted, trained, trustworthy, and competent. They must step up and share liability and responsibility for the pet sitters on the platform.  And, in the event of a pet emergency, including LOST pet situations, Rover and other platforms like it must assume liability and provide comprehensive support (including but not limited to providing trackers, feeding stations with remote cameras, humane traps, a fair reward (more than their current $100), flyer printing, veterinarian bills, and social awareness across relevant platforms) to help get the pet home. This assistance is ongoing until the pet is found or a year's time has passed from the date they went missing. In the event a pet is killed in a sitter's care, he or she will be immediately terminated from the platform, Rover cooperates with any legal action that is taken against the sitter, Rover compensates the owners for the deceased pet and they seek reimbursement from the sitter.

We want regulation in the pet care industry. Pets are beloved members of our family. The gig economy has made it possible for people to work as rideshare drivers, delivery drivers and take care of our pets. Sadly, the regulations have not caught up to this platform.

We want federal and state governments to get involved. They must put comprehensive pet sitting requirements in place that require licenses, certifications, insurance and clear liability to pet sitting platforms.

Rover assumes zero liability if a pet sitter loses, hurts or kills a pet. Very often, when a pet is lost, they allow a significant amount of those pet sitters to continue on the platform. 

We want Rover to step up and do better. What does that mean? 

• They need to be held responsible for vetting their sitters and make sure they are competent to be on their platform. 
• They need to have skin in the game.
• They need to remove the boilerplate CYA terms of service and take responsibility. Today, Rover’s terms of service do not take on any responsibility for pet care providers.

In their section 3 of their terms of service (Compliance with Applicable Law), they state that “Rover is not responsible to ensure that all users have complied with applicable laws and regulations, and will not be liable for a user’s failure to do so.” They release themselves from any responsibility in section 2.3 release: “YOUR USE AND/OR PROVISION OF PET CARE SERVICES IS AT YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE RISK.

The concerns that motivated us to create this petition (some of but not limited to) 

• Rover.com pet sitters are considered to be independent contractors by the company and yet are not required to have insurance to protect themselves, the pet and the client if anything were to go wrong.
• The interview process is inadequate and encourages “hobby sitters” to sign up that are just looking to make a quick buck rather than people who have experience, training and/or knowledge about how to safely take care of animals.
• Rover will not disclosure if a sitter has had any previous negative incidences/marks
• Rover has shown a pattern of conduct of which allows some sitters to remain on the platform after suspicious or alarming incidents have occurred. 
• We have discovered that Rover’s compensation varies from client to client. We can only speculate why that is. Perhaps they may be trying to cut costs? We just don’t know. 
• In the event your sitter loses your pet, you will receive some assistance like $100 reward, flyers, phone services and other minor materials but it is limited and short lived.
• Their policy is to stop most of their lost pet assistance around 3 weeks from the date the pet when missing.
• Because of this experience, we are certain that Rover either does not have a policy that holds the sitters responsible to search for the pets they lost or are not enforcing it if they do.
• We are starting to uncover how wide spread these issues are. We are in the possession of a list of approx. 170 owners of pets that were lost, hurt or killed in the care of a Rover sitter within the last few years. This is added to regularly. Please note this list does not include theft, no shows, inappropriate behavior, neglect,etc - only lost, hurt or killed pets.
• You as a client have very limited authority and/or choices in the event a Rover sitter has lost, hurt or killed your pet. If you so choose, you are able to sue the pet sitter in civil court. The amount you can file for varies state to state approximately $2,500 to $10,000 with a few states with higher caps. While seeking lawyers for representation, we were quoted approx. $2,000 in representation fees. This does not guarantee a positive outcome and/or that we will ever be able to collect that debt. This is a significant disadvantage to the owner and we suspect due to the inability to produce funding (for most middle class families), many sitters have not faced any consequences for their actions. Rover had the added benefit of the lac of public exposure.

Rover.com seems to project a company image of trust and at least in part, some responsibility and accountability for the transactions on the platform. They suggest through advertisements they only allow trustworthy, responsible and competent sitters to contract with them.

Part of Rovers responsibility as a company is to monitor sitters performances and making sure the clients and pets are safeguarded.

If Rover consciously allows sitters who have been proven negligent, incapable, suspicious or dangerous on or back onto the roster, then they are failing to provide the services rendered and jeopardizing the integrity of what they claim their company represents.  

There’s an evident deceptive “bait and switch” misrepresentation component along with other concerns and we also need to include the possibility of breach of contract which then in turn will hold them just as liable as the sitter. They are not fulfilling their end of the transaction. 

The dogs on our petition photo are still lost. Each Rover sitter stopped looking for them less than a day - two days later. Each of them remained on the platform, appearing to have no consequences for the incident or the desertion of the pet and the client. Their stories and/or the links are below.

Acoria and Ripley – Gold and Cream Golden Retrievers- San Antonio, Texas - June 18th, 2019 - 210-608-0867

$7K REWARD for the return of our 2 Missing Female Golden Retrievers! They were lost by the Rover sitter on June 18th, 2019 at the address 18385 Babcock Rd, San Antonio TX running toward Camp Bullis Rd and the Lutheran HS. Acoria is 7 years old, 80-90lbs and wearing a pink Star Wars collar. Ripley is 4 years old, 70lbs and wearing a purple polka dot collar. Click here for more info Acoria and Ripley's Story

Molly - Black, White and Gray Spotted Pointer Mix - New Braunfels, Texas-  December 16th, 2019 - 817-235-6264 or 281-770-7926

Story and Link Coming

Honey - Mixed Breed, Point ears, Medium Build, Brown/Blonde – Mesquite, Texas - July 2nd, 2019 - 214-763-6368 

Story and Link Coming