There’s a million-billion things that could go wrong on vacation. No matter how much you try, there will always be something that is off because Murphy’s Law or any other supernatural force hates it when we have nice things.
And it was no different for this woman, who went on vacation with her family. And one family member decided to completely ignore a key rule that their Airbnb had—no pets allowed. Despite this, she brought her dog along with her.
Needless to say, that didn’t go well as someone’s holiday was totally ruined. Not everyone’s, mind you. Only someone’s.
More Info: Reddit
There’s a million-billion things that could go wrong on vacation, and now 'bringing your dog despite a no pet rule' also makes the list
Image source: Sheila Sund (not the actual photo)
Reddit user u/Rich_Butterscotch850 has recently shared a story on the Am I The A-Hole subreddit of how her sister-in-law tried to effectively ruin the family vacation by refusing to comply with that one single rule their accommodation had. And that was no pets.
The story goes that OP booked an Airbnb for herself, her husband, her sister-in-law and her husband. Their 1-week stay in Tampa, Florida amounted to $4,000, which OP had taken upon herself to cover. You see, OP and her hubby are well-off, so they figured they’d cover the vacation cost so everyone could enjoy themselves without worry.
A Redditor recently shared how their sister-in-law ignored the Airbnb's no pet rule and had their vacation cut short because of it
Image source: Rich_Butterscotch850
OP and the husband decided to take a plane there because it would have otherwise been a 15-hour drive by car. That did not bother the sister-in-law, though, because it turned out to be cheaper for them, so they did just that.
It is important to note at this point that the Airbnb they were staying at did not allow pets.
So, OP and her SO arrived, SIL and her hubby were already in the driveway, awaiting their arrival. The sister asked if they had the keys—they did, picked them up on the way from the airport. “Oh, good, give them to me quick so I can get Brute inside without being seen.”
Wait, what?
Despite being fully aware of it, OP's sister-in-law brought her dog to an Airbnb that did not allow for pets, but OP decided she was having none of it
Image source: Rich_Butterscotch850
OP stopped dead in her tracks, asking what gives—in a much more aggressive tone—expecting that this was perhaps some sick joke. It wasn’t. The sister-in-law kept explaining that she couldn’t find anyone to look after him and trying to guilt-trip OP with how he’s old and “house broken.”
All the while, the Redditor’s husband was sitting in the background, shaking his head, dumbfounded by what was unraveling in front of him. OP herself was surprised by how anyone could ignore an Airbnb rule and not think of the consequences.
So, OP sat in her car and drove to the Airbnb host. There, she got a refund, dropped off the keys and explained the situation. While the host was appreciative of the honesty and kind enough to let the two stay, OP declined, saying the place was just too big for them. Instead, they got an inexpensive hotel for $1,800, instead of the initial $4,000 for the Airbnb.
So, OP got back in the car, went to the host, got the deposit back, and booked a cheaper place just for herself and her hubby, stranding the SIL and her husband
Image source: Paul Joseph (not the actual photo)
During this time, the sister was constantly calling OP, saying she couldn’t afford to stay there, and she didn’t bring anything with her. OP, however, chose to ignore all of it because, in her eyes, the sister made an attempt to ruin their whole trip. A trip she herself paid for in full, no less.
Even the mother-in-law started getting involved, pleading to at least give the sister some money for food, but OP was having none of it, and told her they could go home.
And the community was all in support of OP. For the most part, many pointed out that it is the sister-in-law’s own fault—not only because of failure to find a dog-sitter, but also because folks shouldn’t go on vacation if they can’t afford them at all. So, if anything, she only has herself to blame.
And folks online were all in support of OP, saying that she did the right thing because if her sister-in-law wanted to win stupid prizes, she chose the right game to play
Others noted that it’s people like the sister-in-law who give a bad name to traveling dog owners. If they themselves see houses that don’t allow for pets, they don’t rent them, explaining that what the sister-in-law did was selfish.
Yet others also pointed out that often no-pet rentals have the rule for a reason. For one, there is always a danger of the pet causing damage to the property, but more importantly, hosts and renters with allergies have a hard time being in their own premises because of the allergens that dogs leave.
All in all, nearly 20,000 upvotes and 15 Reddit awards later, the community’s verdict was that OP is not the jerk here. Sister-in-law had one rule, she done goofed up, end of story.
You can check out the story in all of its contextual glory here. Or you can check out some of our other Reddit stories here, here, or here (yes, it’s an article roulette, you’re welcome). But before you do that, share your thoughts on who’s the jerk in this situation, or your vacation mishaps that almost led to the whole vacation being ruined, in the comment section below!