Couldn't agree more. It's unfortunate that there are really no comparable alternatives... and with Doggyvacay acquired by Rover, it doesn't look like there's anyone hot on their tails. I'll still be voicing my issues to Rover themselves in hopes that I'll be 1 of many and some change may come about.

I agree Cindy, I totally am. I just get annoyed when there is no comment to go along with a downvote - it adds nothing to a community setting where most people set out to contribute positively. But you're right... it is quite a distraction.

...communication issues shouldn't exist. Taking into account a sitter's initial response is a smart thing to do on the part of the owner, but again, Rover should be striving to have every initial response be one that would make me want to work with that sitter. Just bad policy on their part, imo.

mmmmmmmm i don't think I can agree with you there, Cindy. I'm talking about basic customer service from an overall vantage point. To be truly satisfied with the Rover "product" (or any product for that matter), the level of frustration brought on by the calendar/availability and subsequent...

I know I've said all this already and am now starting to sound like a broken record. Just saying that Lenna's post is exactly what I was talking about in my original post when I said that more effective communication might help to mitigate some of the frustration created by the calendar issue..

+1 Lena - It's good to hear to that you do not engage in this type of communication, Cindy. And in my opinion, what you describe should be the norm that is mandated by Rover. It's troubling to me to know that Rover is ok with ineffective (and sometimes downright rude) communication with customers.

I stand corrected. However I still maintain my stance that Rover is set up in such a way that all of these small business owners and their performance/conduct are a direct reflection of Rover itself. Maybe the fact that they DON'T consider you all as "employees" (in spirit) is part of the problem.

I can only start to imagine the added complexity that comes along with a bigger city. Frustration abound... for sitters and owners alike. I did just read that Rover recently acquired aa semi-competitor mainly for access to their technology... maybe some good upgrades to the app are in the works.

...they didn't care for their pet adequately), it reflects poorly on that brand. I would venture to guess that Rover considers all of its sitters "employees". Rover is far more than a search engine, as they must stand behind the services advertised and booked through their platform. Unlike Google

And just one final comment on sitters not being employees of Rover... while this is true on paper, its sitters and the level of service they provide is what makes up the majority of Rover's brand. So if a customer is unsatisfied with a sitter (because their calendar isn't up to date or because...

...so to me it is fitting that a customer would express dissatisfaction and that the producer of the product would be eager to hear it and act accordingly. Plus, how can one ever find their favorite sitter if the app enabling the search does not perform?

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say i'm out to fix rover, but I do feel that as consumers (especially of "products" as important to me as rover) we shouldn't have to settle. And I can't think of a worse business model than not wanting to be ever-improving and exceeding customer expectations...

Ridiculous. Thanks Karen. And once again, anyone care to explain so that we can all better understand your viewpoint as a member of this community?

a downvote, really? and without a followup comment. I posted here for some insight and to educate myself regarding an issue with the service. I did not make wild accusations, use offensive language or otherwise come here with the intent of stirring up trouble. Whoever downvoted, please explain...

Also, I was under the impression that this forum was moderated by Rover HQ employees and that this type of post would in fact be heard by some of the right ears.

Absolutely. That is my next step. I wanted to post here first to see if there was any insight to be gained from actual sitters as to why this is the case. Brittney W's post is a perfect example - I was aware of that but I'm sure there are many other facets of which I am unaware.

I disagree about there being little Rover HQ can do. 1). they can fix the app so that so that when a sitter is booked for one service such as boarding, it does not show them as available for another service. 2). they can also modify the workflow/policy to negatively impact a sitter's status/standing/visibility if they do not keep their calendar updated or if they turn down too many jobs (for any reason)... or add incentive for the opposite. An easy way to do this would be to publish stats on each sitter's page indicating the percent of jobs they they accept (or something along those lines)... similar to how stats regarding responsiveness are currently posted. As a customer, if I saw that a sitter only accepts 50% of the jobs they're asked to do, I probably wouldn't waste my time reading their profile and reviews and/or looking at their photos... instead I'd put that time into those with higher percentages. The fact that sitters are independent contractors and that they range from very part-time to 100% full time is irrelevant. Uber has the exact same model and their app does not show a bunch of available cars on the roads who aren't picking up riders. If a driver says he's available, receives a call and does not jump right on it, he will start receiving less calls. Also, there are bonuses awarded every time a driver accepts X rides in a row. Uber is not perfect, but they definitely do not have this issue. Yes, it would be more complicated for Rover to implement something like this, but considering the alternative of doing nothing and having a bunch of frustrated customers such as myself ranting all over the place....

To me, it just sounds like a customer service nightmare and the fact that nothing is being done to rectify the issue tells me something about their corporate values. If there was another comparable option, I would use them instead of Rover because of this.

And yes, all customers should let the sitters they've requested know if they're no longer needed - it's just common courtesy.

yes, I agree that Rover needs to fix their app so that you can give more accurate availability. I also believe the app does show the customer if a sitter has another request pending, which is good.