A letter, keys and a dated notepad on a side table in a rented flat hallway.

Who pays for pest control in a rented Portsmouth home?

7 min read
Rules and permits
When rats or mice appear in a rented Portsmouth home, landlords and tenants often disagree about who should pay. This guide explains how the cause, the building's condition and written reporting decide responsibility, and which legal routes apply.

When pests appear in a rented home in Portsmouth, the first argument is often about who should pay. Tenants assume the landlord must deal with it, landlords suspect the tenant has caused it, and both can be partly right. The answer depends on what caused the problem, the condition of the building and how the problem was reported. This guide sets out the main routes the law provides, how to decide whether a problem is a repair issue or a tenant issue, and why reporting in writing matters from the start.

The landlord's duty to keep a home fit

The starting point in England is the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018. Section 1 inserted section 9A into the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, which implies into most tenancies of less than seven years a covenant that the home is fit for human habitation when the tenancy begins and stays fit throughout, and it added any prescribed Housing Act 2004 hazard to the matters that decide fitness. The 2018 Act does not mention pests, but the prescribed hazards do: the hazard list includes "exposure to pests", which since 23 June 2026 has sat within a single domestic hygiene hazard rather than the older "domestic hygiene, pests and refuse" heading. A tenant can enforce the covenant through the courts, and whether an infestation counts depends on whether it leaves the home not reasonably suitable for occupation.

A rodent problem caused by a gap in an external wall, a broken drain or a hole in the roof is generally the landlord's to fix, because the landlord controls the structure. Tenants should describe the defect when reporting, rather than only the animal, because the structure is what the landlord must repair.

Disrepair versus tenant behaviour

Not every infestation is a disrepair problem. Food left out, bins left open or a lack of cleaning can attract pests even in a well-maintained building, and landlords are right to point out that a tenant's conduct can make a difference. The question is whether the cause is the building or the way it is used. Section 9A draws the same line: the landlord is not liable where the unfitness is wholly or mainly caused by the tenant's own breach of the tenancy, and is not required to carry out work that the tenant must do under the duty to use the home in a tenant-like manner.

A useful test is to ask what the underlying cause is. If droppings appear because a gap under the kitchen cabinets has not been sealed, the cause is the building. If they appear because bins are left open and food waste sits on the floor, the cause is use. Often there is both. The sensible response is for the landlord to deal with the structural part and the tenant to deal with the use, and a dated written record helps both sides separate the two.

The statutory nuisance route

Where a landlord does not act, the local council may be able to help through the statutory nuisance regime. Councils must investigate complaints about issues that could be a statutory nuisance. If the council agrees that a nuisance exists, it must serve an abatement notice, usually on the person responsible. Where the nuisance is caused by a structural defect, the notice must be served on the owner of the premises. That matters for rented homes, because the owner of a let property is often a different person from the occupier.

The Environmental Protection Act 1990 treats premises kept in such a state as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance as a potential statutory nuisance. The statutory nuisance route is a backstop rather than a quick fix. It involves the council's time and a formal process, so tenants usually get further by reporting properly to the landlord first and keeping a record that would support a later complaint.

The Prevention of Damage by Pests Act

For rats and mice specifically, the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949 sets out a separate structure in which owners and occupiers both have roles. The Act allows the local authority to serve notices on the owner or occupier of land requiring them to take steps, and where the owner and occupier are different people, separate notices may be served on each. The notice may require treatment or structural works, and if the person served does not comply, the council may carry out the steps itself and recover its reasonable expenses.

Tenants should know that the 1949 Act puts the reporting duty on the occupier. Under section 3 of the same Part I, an occupier who knows that rats or mice are living on or resorting to the land in substantial numbers must tell the council in writing, whatever the landlord does. The Act is not triggered by one animal seen once, so describe what you have seen with dates and numbers.

Where the owner and occupier disagree about access, the Act provides a route. A court can order an occupier who prevents the owner from carrying out work required by a notice to permit that work. The provision is aimed at situations where a tenant is blocking a necessary repair, so tenants should not stand in the way of works that the notice requires.

Reporting in writing

Whatever route is taken, the foundation is a written report. Tell the landlord or letting agent in writing, by email or letter, what the problem is, where it is, when it started and what has been done. Keep a copy, and add dated photographs. A phone call is worth noting, but it is not enough on its own. Ask for a written response and a timescale for action.

A written record is what allows the statutory nuisance route or the Act's notification duty to be used effectively. Without it, a council must rely on the tenant's account, and a landlord may argue that the problem was never raised. Reporting in writing also shows a landlord that the tenant is acting in good faith, which tends to make the response quicker.

Who pays in practice

In practice, the landlord usually pays for treatment and structural repair where the cause is the building, and the tenant pays where the cause is their own use of the property. Shared costs can arise when both are involved, and any agreement should be recorded in writing. If a landlord refuses to act, the tenant can contact the council, seek advice from a housing adviser and keep records of any costs incurred in response to the problem.

Costs are not always clear-cut. A tenant who calls a contractor without telling the landlord may find the bill disputed. A landlord who instructs a contractor without seeing the survey may find the scope challenged. Telling the other side what you intend to do, and agreeing the work in writing before it starts, avoids most of these disputes.

Getting the right help

If a rented home has pests, begin by writing to the landlord with a clear description of the problem and the cause you suspect. If the response is inadequate, record that too. If the problem involves rats or mice and remains unresolved, the council can be asked to investigate. A survey by a qualified contractor can separate the structural cause from the behavioural one, which helps everyone agree who should act.

To get a quote for an inspection and treatment in a rented home, request a quote and say whether the property is let, who the landlord is and what you have already reported. The pest control services page describes the general scope of work, and the local areas covered by this site are listed for reference. How this site works explains how quotes are passed on. The site does not give legal advice, and a tenant with a complex dispute should seek advice from a housing adviser. For the council side of the process, the council pest reports guide explains what to expect.