PestShield Inspection finding and treatment plan Pest Inspection · from USD 95
Rodent activity confirmed, and the hole it is coming through
Singapore. What was found, what the treatment needs from you, and why proofing matters more than bait.
Rodent activity confirmed in the rear store and the void behind the kitchen units. The entry point is a 40 mm gap around the waste pipe at the rear wall. Treating without closing that gap would work for about three weeks.
Droppings, gnaw damage to two sacks and a greasy rub mark along the rear skirting, all consistent with Rattus norvegicus. One entry point: an unsealed 40 mm gap around the waste pipe. A baiting programme will reduce the population now. It will not stop reinfestation, and the proofing visit is what does.
Order record
- Pest InspectionFull unit, 90 minutes, with written finding USD 102
- Photographic evidence14 images, located and dated Included
- Rodent ProgrammeRecommended. Baiting, monitoring, three return visits Included
- Proofing VisitRecommended. Seal the pipe penetration and two minor gaps Included
- Prevention PlanQuarterly monitoring after treatment Included
- Documentation for auditIncluded with any treatment, for your licence file Included
Paid in full, 1 October 2026 · USDC on Base
Evidence
What was found, and where
| Location | Evidence | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Rear store, floor behind racking | Droppings, approximately 40, fresh and older | Active, regular |
| Rear store, two rice sacks | Gnaw damage, spillage | Active feeding |
| Kitchen, behind units, void | Rub marks along skirting, 60 cm run | Established runway |
| Rear wall, waste pipe penetration | Unsealed gap, 40 mm | Entry point |
| Front of house, dining area | No evidence | Clear |
| Ceiling void, accessible section | No evidence | Clear |
| External bin area | Bins lidded and clean | Not contributing |
Species identified as Rattus norvegicus from droppings and rub mark height. This matters because it is a ground-level burrowing species, which is consistent with a gap at floor level at the rear and inconsistent with a roof entry.
The fix
Why proofing is the recommendation, not baiting
| Baiting alone | Proofing alone | Both, in order | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reduces the current population | Yes | No | Yes |
| Stops reinfestation | No | Yes | Yes |
| Risk of a rodent dying in the void | Yes | Higher if sealed in | Managed by sequencing |
| Acceptable to an inspector | Partly | Partly | Yes |
| Likely state in 3 months | Reinfested | Existing rodents still inside | Clear |
The sequence matters: bait first, monitor for two weeks, then proof. Sealing the entry before the population is reduced traps animals inside, and a rat that dies in a kitchen void is a worse problem than the one you started with.
Preparation
What you must do before the treatment visit
- All open food moved to sealed containers or out of the unit
- Rear store cleared to floor level along the back wall, so bait points can be placed properly
- The two damaged rice sacks disposed of before the visit, not after
- Staff told the visit is happening and told not to move any bait station
- Your cat kept off the premises for the treatment day and for 48 hours after
- Food preparation suspended for 4 hours from the start of the visit
Food premises
What this means for your licence file
| Item | Provided |
|---|---|
| Dated inspection finding with photographs | This document |
| Treatment record with products and quantities | With each visit |
| Technician licence number on every record | Yes |
| Bait station plan showing locations | With the programme |
| Monitoring results at each return visit | Three visits |
| Proofing completion record with photographs | With the proofing visit |
| Clearance statement when activity ceases | If and when it does |
An inspector asking about rodent control wants to see a documented programme rather than a clean floor. The last row says if and when deliberately: nobody can certify a premises as permanently pest free, and a company that offers to is selling you a piece of paper.