4.8

I used Lorri’s daycare services for my service animal, Shadow, for several months. While I believe Lorri may be well-intentioned, and while Shadow initially appeared comfortable in her care, I ultimately cannot recommend her as a care provider based on serious concerns involving supervision, safety, communication, and the way concerns were documented after I questioned her care practices. My primary concern is that Lorri appeared to be accepting more dogs than she could safely manage by herself in her personal residence. At times, there appeared to be a large number of dogs present in the home, and in my view, the environment was not being safely controlled for the number of animals under her care. One specific incident occurred when I arrived to pick up Shadow after completing medical treatment. During that pickup, Lorri did not appear to have control over the dogs in her home, and one dog ran out into the street. Lorri asked me to help chase down the dog even though I had just completed treatment and was not physically able to assist. Thankfully, Shadow remained trained, calm, and controlled at my side during the incident. That experience raised serious concerns for me about whether the dogs in her care were being adequately supervised and protected from preventable safety risks. I have reported these safety concerns to Rover, and I intend to report the residential daycare / kennel concerns to the City of Oxnard for review. My concern is not to interfere with anyone’s livelihood, but future clients should understand that this appeared to be a private-residence daycare setting where one person was attempting to manage more dogs than she could safely control. I also became concerned about how Lorri documented Shadow’s behavior after I raised concerns about safety, supervision, and her unsupported behavioral assessments. In my view, Lorri became defensive and later attempted to characterize Shadow as reactive or behaviorally concerning, even though the surrounding Rover chat history, prior daycare history, and Shadow’s conduct did not support that characterization. I disputed those statements with Rover because I believed they were subjective, unsupported, and potentially damaging to Shadow’s ability to receive future care. After speaking with Rover regarding the investigation, my understanding is that Shadow was cleared regarding the behavioral concerns raised against him, while Rover’s review of Lorri’s conduct and suitability as a provider remains ongoing. Care providers should absolutely report legitimate safety concerns. My issue is not that a provider reported a concern. My issue is that, based on my experience, Lorri appeared to use unsupported behavioral labels after I challenged her care practices, and those labels could have negatively affected my service animal’s future care options on Rover. Future clients should be cautious if their dog requires structured supervision, careful handling, or a provider who can safely manage multiple dogs in a controlled environment. I hope Rover takes appropriate steps to ensure that any dogs placed in Lorri’s care are given proper attention in safe conditions. Based on my experience, however, I would not use her services again.

Our girl Jetta had the best time boarding with Lorri and her "pack". Excellent communication, frequent updates, and our pup gets so spoiled when she stays with Lorri. We highly recommend her, thank you!

I used Lorri’s daycare services for my dog Shadow while I attended medical treatment. Shadow appeared to like Lorri and was often described positively in her own Rover cards and messages, including as happy, playful, affectionate, and generally behaving positively at her home. However, I ultimately cannot recommend this provider because of serious concerns about communication, documentation, and how behavioral issues were handled. My main concern is that Lorri began placing negative behavioral labels in Shadow’s Rover cards, including terms such as “possessiveness,” “aggressive,” “protection mode,” and “charging,” without consistently providing clear objective support or sufficient context. These types of labels can negatively affect a dog’s future care options if they are reviewed by Rover, other providers, trainers, insurers, or others. I repeatedly asked that any behavioral concerns be documented with specific observable conduct, triggers, dogs or people involved, whether there was physical contact or injury, and whether Shadow redirected. There were also communication issues. A May 29 Rover card described concerning behavior that appeared to have occurred around 3:00 p.m., but I was not notified in real time. Instead, I learned about the concerns later. After I requested real-time notification, Lorri did begin messaging me, but the situation quickly escalated into disagreement over how Shadow’s behavior was being characterized. One of the most concerning examples involved the May 30 Rover card. Lorri sent me a video and described Shadow’s behavior as a “glimpse” of possessiveness. After reviewing the video, I explained that the behavior appeared to me to be demand barking or an attempt to get another dog’s attention, not aggression or possessiveness. Despite that discussion taking place before the Rover card was finalized, the card still characterized the incident as possessiveness without noting that I disputed the interpretation based on the video she provided. Lorri also repeatedly acknowledged that she is not a dog trainer. That is important because she was using behavioral terminology that can carry serious negative implications. My issue was not that she reported concerns. I wanted legitimate issues reported promptly. My concern was that subjective conclusions were being placed into Rover cards without the level of objective detail or context needed for a fair behavioral record. After I objected to the unsupported negative wording and asked that future Rover cards avoid subjective behavioral labels unless objectively supported, Lorri terminated Shadow’s daycare relationship during an already-booked service week. This created additional concern because she was aware that I relied on daycare during dialysis and medical treatment days. Based on my experience, Lorri may be suitable for owners who are comfortable with her judgment and communication style. However, if you need precise, objective, carefully contextualized reporting about your dog’s behavior, especially where written records on the Rover platform could matter later, I would be cautious.

Lori is absolutely amazing! She pours so much love and care into the dogs she cares for.

Jetta always has a great time with Lorri! Lots of stimulation, yummy treats, furry friends, and comfy quarters. Lorri is a great communicator, can't recommend her enough! Thank you!

Jetta had the best time at daycare with Lorri and the "pack"! Lorri has excellent communication, sends updates, and really helps us feel comfortable knowing our girl is so well taken care of in our absence. We can't recommend her enough, thank you!