‘They did a $1,400 surgery’: Dog-sitter makes executive decision to take canine for emergency treatment while doggo owner is unresponsive, owner refuses to reimburse dog-sitter for the bill

Hey there, friends and fellow canine lovers! When we go on vacation—or travel for any reason—we always make sure to leave our doggos in capable hands we trust. We also provide our pet sitters with contact information for our local veterinarian in case of emergencies. While emergencies may not be likely, it's always better to be safe than sorry.

The original poster (OP) of the thread we're featuring today agreed to pet-sit his friend's dog while she went on vacation. Specifically, she attended a music festival and was largely unavailable during the time OP was watching the doggo. A few days into the week-long pet-sitting arrangement, the dog, Cherry, became very sick, and it was clear to OP that she needed immediate medical attention. After unsuccessfully trying to reach his friend, OP made the decision to take Cherry to an emergency vet. She was diagnosed with a blockage and required surgery, which cost $1,400. When OP's friend finally got back to him, she was shocked that he had approved such an expensive treatment without consulting her and refused to reimburse him for the vet expenses.

Now, we're a bit torn on this one. That's because it's unclear what caused the blockage in the first place. If OP was responsible—say, by giving the dog something harmful—then it makes sense that the financial burden should fall on him. But if it was a freak accident unrelated to OP's care, then it seems fair that Cherry's owner should take responsibility.