Who Pays for Bed Bug Treatment in an Ontario Rental?

In almost every case, the landlord pays. Section 20 (1) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 makes keeping the building fit for habitation your job. To shift the cost, you have to prove under section 34 that one of three people caused undue damage wilfully or negligently. That is hard to do with an insect.

That answer surprises owners who assume whoever brought the bugs home should pay for them. Here is why the law lands where it does, what you can still recover, and what to do when a tenant will not get the unit ready.

Why is pest control the landlord's job in Ontario?

Because the duty to keep the unit habitable is yours and it is not tied to fault. Section 20 (1) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 reads: "A landlord is responsible for providing and maintaining a residential complex, including the rental units in it, in a good state of repair and fit for habitation and for complying with health, safety, housing and maintenance standards."

The Act itself never says "pest", "insect", "vermin" or "bed bug"; across the whole consolidation, read at source on 2026-11-12, each of those words appears zero times. The specific rule sits one level down, in the maintenance standards.

Section 46 of O. Reg. 517/06, headed "Rodents, etc.", has three subsections. Subsection (1) says "A residential complex shall be kept reasonably free of rodents, vermin and insects." Subsection (2) requires that "The methods used for exterminating rodents and insects shall be in accordance with applicable municipal or provincial law." Subsection (3) requires openings and holes in a building with rental units to be "screened or sealed to prevent the entry of rodents, vermin, insects and other pests."

Section 2 (2) of the same regulation puts compliance on you: "Except as otherwise provided, the landlord shall ensure that the maintenance standards in this Regulation are complied with."

One catch on where that standard applies. Section 224 (1) of the Act switches the provincial standards on where no municipal property standards by-law applies to the building. Section 4 of O. Reg. 517/06 keeps the interior standards, section 46 included, in force where a by-law covers only the exterior. Where a full by-law applies, its own text is the standard, as our guide to finding your property standards by-law explains. Either way, section 20 (1) makes complying with it your obligation.

The Landlord and Tenant Board reads the habitability duty the same way. Its Interpretation Guideline 5, on maintenance obligations, says of habitability that "Generally, it is enough for any part of the premises to be unfit." The first example it lists is "infestations of rodents or vermin".

Does it matter that the tenant moved in knowing about the problem, or signed a lease saying they pay?

No, on both counts. Section 20 (2) says subsection (1) "applies even if the tenant was aware of a state of non-repair or a contravention of a standard before entering into the tenancy agreement." A unit rented with a known pest problem is still yours to treat.

A lease clause will not move the cost either. Section 4 (1) makes a provision in a tenancy agreement that is inconsistent with the Act void. Guideline 5 adds that if a tenant agreed in a lease "to assume the responsibility to maintain any part of the unit or complex, beyond ordinary cleanliness and damage, this would not be enforceable."

The same goes for a "pest treatment fee" added at move-in or after an outbreak. Section 134 (1) (a) bars a landlord from collecting or requiring "a fee, premium, commission, bonus, penalty, key deposit or other like amount of money".

Section 17 of O. Reg. 516/06 lists nine payments that are exempt, and none of them is a pest charge. The one that matters here is paragraph 6, a payment "in settlement of a court action or potential court action or an application or potential application to the Board".

When can you make the tenant pay for treatment?

Only where you can bring the cost inside section 34, and that is a high bar for bed bugs. Section 34 reads: "The tenant is responsible for the repair of undue damage to the rental unit or residential complex caused by the wilful or negligent conduct of the tenant, another occupant of the rental unit or a person permitted in the residential complex by the tenant."

Read it limb by limb and three questions follow. Is an infestation "undue damage" to the unit at all, rather than a condition of it? Was it "caused by" someone's conduct? And was that conduct wilful or negligent, rather than bad luck on a bus or in a hotel? Every one of those is the landlord's to prove.

The Act does not answer the first question, and we are not aware of a provision that does. On our reading, an owner who can show only that the bugs started in one unit has proved where they started, not that anyone was negligent. Guideline 5 says that where the landlord says a repair was the tenant's responsibility, "this issue must be decided by the Member". It is a question of evidence, decided case by case.

If you do have that evidence, the routes are the ordinary damage routes, set out at length in our post on charging a tenant for damage:

• A money claim. Section 89 (1) lets you apply for "reasonable costs that the landlord has incurred or will incur for the repair of or, where repairing is not reasonable, the replacement of damaged property". Under section 89 (1.1) you file while the tenant is in possession, or "no later than one year after" they leave.
• A notice with a cure. Section 62 lets you give a notice of termination for wilful or negligent undue damage. The termination date can be no earlier than the 20th day after the notice is given. The notice must require the tenant, within seven days, to repair or replace the damaged property or pay the reasonable cost. Under section 62 (3) the notice is void if the tenant does that, or makes arrangements satisfactory to you, within seven days.
• A settlement. A written payment agreement that settles a claim you could bring is the paragraph 6 exemption above, so it is not an illegal charge.

What section 34 does not reach is ordinary mess. Section 33 makes the tenant responsible for "ordinary cleanliness of the rental unit". A cluttered unit can make treatment harder, but on our reading clutter is not damage, and section 33 does not convert it into a bill for the exterminator.

What can you do if the tenant will not prepare the unit or let the exterminator in?

Start with a proper notice of entry. Paragraph 1 of section 27 (1) allows entry "To carry out a repair or replacement or do work in the rental unit" on 24 hours' written notice. Section 27 (3) says the notice "shall specify the reason for entry, the day of entry and a time of entry between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m."

The LTB's Guideline 19, on the landlord's right of entry, adds that "A tenant does not have the right to deny entry simply because the time of entry is not convenient to the tenant." It says the tenant must "take whatever steps are necessary to provide access to rooms where the work is to occur, including safely restraining pets in the rental unit."

That is a duty to give access, not a written duty to do everything on an exterminator's preparation sheet. Neither the Act nor O. Reg. 517/06 sets out any duty to prepare a unit for pest treatment. If a tenant will not bag clothing or move furniture away from the walls, solve it as a practical problem first. Talk, and where it helps, pay for the labour.

If refusal persists, there are two consequences, and both run in your favour.

First, it protects you at the Board. Guideline 5 says a tenant "may have unreasonably prevented the landlord from entering the unit to assess the problem or make the repairs", and that "the tenant's conduct may result in no abatement or other remedy."

Second, it may ground a notice. Section 64 (1) lets you give notice where the tenant's conduct "substantially interferes with the reasonable enjoyment of the residential complex for all usual purposes by the landlord or another tenant or substantially interferes with another lawful right, privilege or interest of the landlord or another tenant."

On our reading, refusing a valid section 27 entry interferes with a lawful right of the landlord, and Guideline 19 says the tenant must "not interfere with the landlord's right of entry". The termination date can be no earlier than the 20th day after the notice is given. The notice must require the tenant to stop the conduct or correct the omission within seven days. Under section 64 (3) it is void if they do.

What does a tenant get if you are slow to treat?

Potentially quite a lot, and this is where the real cost sits. Paragraph 1 of section 29 (1) lets a tenant or former tenant apply for an order that you breached section 20 (1). That is the T6, covered in full in our post on what happens when a tenant files a T6.

Section 30 (1) then gives the Board nine remedies. Two of them carry the cost on a pest file. Paragraph 2 is "an abatement of rent". Paragraph 5 covers the tenant's reasonable costs of repairing or replacing their own property "damaged, destroyed or disposed of as a result of the landlord's breach", plus other reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. Discarded mattresses and laundry bills belong in paragraph 5.

Two features work for an owner who was not told, or who moved quickly:

• Section 30 (2): in deciding the remedy, the Board "shall consider whether the tenant or former tenant advised the landlord of the alleged breaches before applying to the Board."
• Guideline 5 on abatements: an abatement "is not appropriate where the landlord was not aware of the problem until the application was filed", and "If the landlord has already rectified the problem, and did so within a reasonable time, an abatement is not appropriate."

The limitation period does not help a slow owner. Section 29 (2) gives a tenant one year "after the day the alleged conduct giving rise to the application occurred". Guideline 5 says that where a breach is ongoing, "the limitation period runs from the date that the repair is completed or the standard is complied with." On that approach, an infestation left untreated keeps the clock from starting.

How does this play out on a Kingston duplex?

Take a hypothetical up-and-down duplex in Kingston. The upper tenant texts on a Monday morning to say they have been bitten and found insects in the mattress seams. The lower tenant has said nothing.

The owner books a licensed pest control operator for an inspection of both units. Written notice is handed to both tenants that Monday at 10 a.m., naming the reason, the day and an entry time of 11 a.m. on Tuesday. That is 25 hours later and inside the 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. window; a mailed notice would not count until the fifth day.

Both inspection notices rely on paragraph 4 of section 27 (1), an inspection for compliance with maintenance standards. It applies only where "it is reasonable to carry out the inspection". An active infestation next door is a strong reason.

The inspection confirms bed bugs upstairs and a light presence downstairs. Treatment for both units is booked under paragraph 1, work in the unit, and the operator's preparation sheet goes out with the entry notices.

Now the money. The treatment invoice is the owner's under section 20 (1). Suppose the owner learns the upper tenant brought home a second-hand couch from the curb. That fact proves where the bugs probably came from. It does not obviously prove negligence or "undue damage" to the unit. An L2 for the invoice would be a contested hearing with an uncertain result.

With valid notice the owner may still enter. Guideline 19 says the right "can be exercised if the tenant is not in the rental unit at the time of entry."

Suppose instead the lower tenant blocks the treatment and the operator charges a return-visit fee. On our reading, that fee is not the "repair of or ... replacement of damaged property" that section 89 (1) pays for, so it is the owner's cost too. The owner's lever is a section 64 notice if the refusal continues, and the protection is the record: dated notices, the operator's report and the tenant's refusal in writing.

The owner who acted within a day, kept the paper, and treated both units has done what Guideline 5 rewards. If the upper tenant later files a T6, the Board will see a landlord who knew on Monday and had an operator inside on Tuesday.

What should an owner do the day a tenant reports bed bugs?

Treat it as a maintenance call with a deadline you cannot see. The steps that protect you are the same whether or not you suspect the tenant:

• Acknowledge in writing the same day. Section 30 (2) and Guideline 5 both turn on what you knew and when.
• Use a licensed operator. Section 46 (2) of O. Reg. 517/06 requires extermination methods to follow applicable municipal or provincial law, and where a by-law applies instead, check its own pest clause.
• Inspect the neighbouring units on proper notice under paragraph 4 of section 27 (1), recording why the inspection is reasonable.
• Serve entry notices that meet section 27 (3): reason, day, and a time between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Attend with the operator, as Guideline 19 expects, and keep entries to the ones the work needs, because unnecessary entries can be found to be interference or harassment.
• Keep every report and every refusal, because those documents decide any later abatement or damage claim.
• Do not invoice the tenant. If you believe section 34 applies, use section 89, a section 62 notice or a written settlement.

On a building with more than one unit, speed matters twice over, because an infestation that spreads turns one treatment into several. A property manager takes that coordination off your hands: one call, a booked operator, correct notices, and a file that stands up if anyone applies.

What do owners ask about bed bugs in a rental?

Who pays for bed bug treatment in an Ontario rental?

The landlord, in almost every case. Section 20 (1) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 makes the landlord responsible for keeping the unit fit for habitation and compliant with maintenance standards. Where O. Reg. 517/06 applies, its section 46 (1) requires a residential complex to be kept reasonably free of rodents, vermin and insects.

Can I charge my tenant if they brought the bed bugs in?

Only if you can prove undue damage caused by the wilful or negligent conduct of the tenant, another occupant or someone they let in, under section 34. You cannot simply invoice them, because section 134 (1) bars extra fees; the routes are an application under section 89, a section 62 notice, or a written settlement.

Can a tenant refuse entry for pest treatment?

Not where you have given written notice at least 24 hours ahead that states the reason, the day and a time between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. The LTB's Guideline 19 says inconvenience is not a reason to deny entry, and Guideline 5 says a tenant who unreasonably prevents entry may get no abatement.

Bed bugs are a maintenance problem in law even when they feel like a tenant problem. The owners who come out ahead are the ones who treat fast and keep the paper.

Own a rental in Kingston or Eastern Ontario? KEILTY Realty Management manages it for a flat monthly rate. Get a free rental evaluation or book a 30-minute discovery call with A.J. Keilty.

This post is general information about Ontario residential tenancy law as of 2026-11-12, not legal advice. Legislation, regulations and tribunal practice change. For advice on a specific property or situation, speak with a lawyer or licensed paralegal.