Defend Pest Solutions vs. Orkin
Defend Pest Solutions ranks #52 of 164 and Orkin ranks #140 of 164 in the West, with Handshake Scores of 8.0 and 6.8 out of 10. Both have locations on file in North Dakota and South Dakota. Orkin also has locations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Wyoming.
This comparison sets their verified records side by side: the five scored factors, review platforms, BBB, contract terms, licensing and legal record. It draws no conclusion beyond the scores. The small numbers link to each fact’s source, and each company’s full review has the rest.
At a glance
#52 of 164 in the West
Defend Pest Solutions8.0/10Handshake Score · Provisional. #52 of 164 in the West
| Defend Pest Solutions | Orkin | |
|---|---|---|
| Rank | #52 of 164 in the West | #140 of 164 in the West |
| Confidence | Low | Medium |
| Provisional score | Yes | No |
| Door-to-door sales | N/A5 | N/A7, 8, 4, 9 |
| Ownership | Independent2, 4 | SubsidiaryParent: Rollins, Inc. (NYSE: ROL)2, 3, 4, 5 |
| Headquarters | Sioux Falls, South Dakota3 | Atlanta, Georgia3 |
| States on file | North Dakota and South Dakota3 locations | Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Wyoming177 locations |
| Record verified | October 27, 2026 | October 11, 2026 |
Our research
How they score
The Handshake Score is a weighted average of five factors, each scored from 0 to 10 from verified records. The percentage beside each factor is its weight. Each score links to the deductions behind it on the company’s review.
| Defend Pest Solutions | Orkin | |
|---|---|---|
| Customer satisfaction 35% | 9.6 | 8.9 |
| Defend Pest Solutions scores higher on customer satisfaction (9.6 vs. 8.9). | ||
| Complaint record 10% | 10.0 | N/A |
| Defend Pest Solutions scores 10.0 on complaint record; Orkin isn’t scored on it. | ||
| Sales and contract fairness 15% | N/A | 5.0 |
| Orkin scores 5.0 on sales and contract fairness; Defend Pest Solutions isn’t scored on it. | ||
| Licensing and compliance 15% | 10.0 | 6.5 |
| Defend Pest Solutions scores higher on licensing and compliance (10.0 vs. 6.5). | ||
| Legal and regulatory record 15% | 10.0 | 7.5 |
| Defend Pest Solutions scores higher on legal and regulatory record (10.0 vs. 7.5). | ||
| Handshake Score | 8.0/10 | 6.8/10 |
| Defend Pest Solutions has the higher Handshake Score (8.0 vs. 6.8). | ||
Defend Pest Solutions had no usable inputs for sales and contract fairness, so that factor was left out of its score and its remaining weights were scaled up to 100%.
Orkin had no usable inputs for complaint record, so that factor was left out of its score and its remaining weights were scaled up to 100%.
Workplace
We rate how companies treat employees from employee-review sites and wage-and-hour records. A workplace score is computed and carries 10% of the Handshake Score when there are at least 20 employee reviews on file (otherwise excluded and remaining weights renormalized).
| Defend Pest Solutions | Orkin | |
|---|---|---|
| Workplace score | N/A | 5.0 |
| Orkin has a workplace score of 5.0; Defend Pest Solutions isn’t rated. | ||
Review platforms
Google figures cover each company’s western US listings; the average is weighted by each listing’s review count. Ratings and counts are as each site showed them on the date retrieved.
| Defend Pest Solutions | Orkin | |
|---|---|---|
| Google listings in the West | 2 | 147 |
| Google reviews | 824 | 173,872 |
| Google average | 4.9 | 4.7 |
Defend Pest Solutions 3 review profiles
| Platform and scope | Rating | Reviews | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| GoogleSioux Falls, South Dakota | 4.9/5 | 347 | View |
| GoogleFargo, North Dakota | 4.9/5 | 477 | View |
| BBBSioux Falls, South Dakota | — | 0 | View |
Orkin 180 review profiles
| Platform and scope | Rating | Reviews | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| GoogleTacoma, Washington | 4.7/5 | 2,625 | View |
| GoogleWilsonville, Oregon | 4.8/5 | 2,589 | View |
| GoogleBoise, Idaho | 4.9/5 | 2,372 | View |
| GoogleEverett, Washington | 4.8/5 | 2,252 | View |
| GoogleSpokane Valley, Washington | 4.8/5 | 2,136 | View |
| GoogleEugene, Oregon | 4.7/5 | 1,348 | View |
| GooglePasco, Washington | 4.5/5 | 690 | View |
| GoogleBellingham, Washington | 4.8/5 | 516 | View |
| GoogleKent, Washington | 4.6/5 | 404 | View |
| GooglePortland, Oregon | 4.7/5 | 339 | View |
| GoogleKent, Washington | 4.8/5 | 339 | View |
| GoogleChubbuck, Idaho | 4.9/5 | 326 | View |
Better Business Bureau
Defend Pest Solutions. Its BBB profiles show 0 complaints in the last three years; grades vary by branch.
Orkin. Its BBB profile shows an A+ grade; the complaint counts on file conflict.
| Defend Pest Solutions | Orkin | |
|---|---|---|
| BBB grade | Not Rated2, 10 | A+26, 192, 193, 194, +6 |
| Accredited | No | No |
| Complaints, last 3 years | 0 | Conflicting counts on file (each profile’s is listed below) |
| BBB customer reviews | No reviews | No reviews |
| Profile scope | Sioux Falls, South Dakota (3200 E Woodsedge St); BBB of Midwest Plains; no ND file found in BBB search for Sioux Falls | Not attributable to Pacific Northwest corporate branches: Orkin’s national Atlanta, Georgia HQ BBB profile (Rollins/Orkin, 1,241 complaints in 3 years) is company-wide without a state breakdown, while the Garden City, Idaho profile (Sawyer, Inc. franchisee) covers only three Idaho branches and excludes all Washington and Oregon corporate locations. |
| Retrieved | November 2, 2026 | October 11, 2026 |
| Profiles |
Contract terms
Terms as recorded from the linked sources.
Defend Pest Solutions 1 term
No pricing, minimum term, auto-renewal, cancellation fee, cancellation method or arbitration terms are published on the company website (home, about, services, residential, rodent and bat pages read).6
Orkin 11 terms
Orkin does not publish prices; cost is quoted locally.3
Residential guarantee: free re-service between scheduled treatments and a money-back guarantee (company terms).10
The About page describes the residential money-back guarantee as 30 days.3
Orkin says its commercial ‘Triple Guarantee’ includes a 2-hour response/24-hour on-site guarantee, reimbursement of regulatory fines caused solely by pests, and three 60-day complimentary-service guarantees (company terms).10
Introductory promotion shown on the homepage: $50 off the first recurring service.6
Rollins (parent) says its pest and termite services are performed under contracts that specify pricing.4
Customer report (Eugene, Oregon Google review): a 30-day cancellation notice is required.11
Customer report (Everett, Washington Google review): about a 40% price increase within a year, attributed to a contract price-increase clause.12
Customer report (Kent, Washington Google review): a one-time wasp treatment came with a 30-day warranty.13
Orkin’s official cancellation policy states that standard recurring residential pest control plans require a 12-month initial agreement, that customers must call 877-819-5061 or their local branch to cancel (no online self-service cancellation), and that canceling before the initial 12-month term ends requires paying the remaining balance under the service agreement.14
Orkin’s standard residential service agreement (form AG1218) includes a mandatory binding arbitration clause and class-action waiver.15
Licensing and registrations
Status and expiry dates are shown exactly as the issuing agency’s record showed them on the date retrieved.
Defend Pest Solutions 7 records (South Dakota 4, North Dakota 3)
| State | Authority and type | Number | Status | Expires | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| South Dakota | South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesCommercial applicator (individual license; SD issues no company pest-control license) | Not shown | Company roster (Company search “Defend”): 9 people tied to Defend Pest Solutions; current license for Steven Johnson (No. 50896, exp. Mar 31 2028, categories G,8,9). Owner Gordon Dotson (No. 21873) and Steven Ewell (No. 21871) show EXPIRED; Peyton Cambier (22384) EXPIRED; Jacob Kampmann (51386, categories G,8) has no expiration shown; others have no current license. | individual licenses expire Mar 31 | 11 |
| South Dakota | South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesCommercial applicator, owner Gordon Dotson (individual) | 21873 | EXPIRED | Not shown | 12 |
| South Dakota | South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesCommercial applicator, “Ewell, Steven” (likely owner Tyler Ewell, North Dakota record is Steven Tyler Ewell; individual) | 21871 | EXPIRED | Not shown | 13 |
| South Dakota | South Dakota Secretary of StateBusiness registry | Not shown | Not verified (search blocked by reCAPTCHA) | Not shown | see record |
| North Dakota | North Dakota State University Extension Pesticide Certification and Training Program (certifies; North Dakota Department of Agriculture enforces)Commercial applicator certificate, owner Gordon Harrison Dotson (individual; ND has no company license) | 10173428 | Active; CORE, HOME-INDUSTRIAL, PUBLIC HEALTH, VERTEBRATE certified 06/05/2024 | April 1st, 2027 | 14 |
| North Dakota | North Dakota State University Extension Pesticide Certification and Training Program (certifies; North Dakota Department of Agriculture enforces)Commercial applicator certificate, owner Steven Tyler Ewell (individual) | 10173430 | Active; CORE, HOME-INDUSTRIAL, PUBLIC HEALTH, VERTEBRATE certified 06/05/2024 | April 1st, 2027 | 15 |
| North Dakota | North Dakota Secretary of StateForeign LLC registration (Defend Pest Solutions LLC, formed in South Dakota) | 0006685997 | Active, Good Standing; initial filing 05/29/2024; AR due 11/16/2026 | Not shown | 3 |
Orkin 171 records (Washington 5, Oregon 8, Idaho 5, Texas 44, California 48, Louisiana 12, Colorado 9, Oklahoma 8, Kansas 5, Iowa 6, Missouri 8, Minnesota 2, Utah 1, Nevada 3, Arizona 3, Arkansas 2, New Mexico 1, North Dakota 1)
| State | Authority and type | Number | Status | Expires | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Washington | Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Pesticide LicensingCommercial Applicator (company: Orkin Exterminating Company, Tacoma; branches Wilsonville Oregon, Vancouver, Everett, Bellingham, Surety Pest Control Oak Harbor) | 111368 | Renewed | 12/31/2026 | 206 |
| Washington | Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Pesticide LicensingCommercial Applicator (company: Orkin Exterminating Company, Spokane Valley) | 75413 | Renewed | 12/31/2026 | 207 |
| Washington | Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Pesticide LicensingCommercial Applicator (company: Orkin Exterminating Company, Pasco; DBA Crazy Frog Pest Control) | 79879 | Expired | 12/31/2025 | 208 |
| Washington | Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Pesticide LicensingCommercial Applicator (company: Orkin Pest Control, Kent; DBAs Acurid Commercial Services, Rollins Inc; branch Orkin Inc Clackamas Oregon) | 81458 | Renewed | 12/31/2026 | 209 |
| Washington | Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Pesticide LicensingCommercial Applicator (company: PNWPestSolutions LLC DBA Orkin Pest Control, Hayden Idaho) | 92642 | Expired | 12/31/2025 | 210 |
| Oregon | Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) Pesticide LicensingCommercial Pesticide Operator (ORKIN EXTERMINATING INC, DBA ORKIN EXTERMINATING INC) | AG-L0001318CPO | Active | 31-DEC-26 | 211 |
Legal and regulatory record
Only resolved government actions count toward the legal and regulatory score. Pending lawsuits, allegations and private matters are listed but not scored. Summaries are our researchers’ wording of the source; allegations are allegations, not findings.
Defend Pest Solutions 4 records
Legal and regulatory score: 10.0/10. Records counted in it: none.
November 2, 2026 · Complaint summaryUsed in complaint record
South Dakota
BBB profile (BBB of Midwest Plains) shows 0 complaints and 0 customer reviews; business not BBB accredited; BBB rating “Not Rated”. File opened 9/1/2022.16
November 2, 2026 · EnforcementShown only
North Dakota
North Dakota Attorney General cease-and-desist orders page: no entry for Defend Pest Solutions, Dotson or Ewell (list covers 2018-2023 entries as displayed).17
November 2, 2026 · PermitShown only
North Dakota
North Dakota AG transient merchant (door-to-door) licensee list: no entry for Defend Pest Solutions, Dotson or Ewell.5
November 2, 2026 · LawsuitShown only
federal
CourtListener opinions search (default published-opinions results) for “Defend Pest Solutions”: no results. Docket and state-court records not searched.18
Orkin 38 records
Legal and regulatory score: 7.5/10. Records counted in it: 2 of 38.
November 19, 2025 · SettlementScored: legal record
Superior Court of California (civil enforcement by 12 county District Attorneys incl. Orange, Contra Costa and San Mateo; Orkin Services of California)
The People of the State of California v. Clark Pest Control of Stockton, Inc. et al.: stipulated final judgment and permanent injunction (entered Nov 19, 2025) with Clark Pest Control of Stockton, Orkin Services of California and Crane Pest Control (all Rollins, Inc.). It resolved allegations of unlawful disposal of pesticides and hazardous waste in dumpsters, and of customer records discarded without shredding, found in 2021-2022 audits of 40 dumpsters at 22 Clark and Orkin facilities. Total $3,150,000 ($2,017,000 civil penalties; $400,000 supplemental environmental projects; $400,000 compliance-measure credit; $333,000 investigative costs), shared among the three companies. The DA said the companies cooperated.244, 245, 246
April 18, 2022 · SettlementScored: legal record
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (national; parent Rollins Inc.)
Rollins Inc., Orkin’s parent, agreed to pay an $8 million civil penalty, without admitting or denying the findings, to settle SEC charges that it made unsupported reductions to accounting reserves in Q1 2016 and Q2 2017 to round up reported EPS to meet analyst estimates. Its then-CFO paid $100,000. This concerns financial reporting, not pest-control service.243
October 28, 2026 · Complaint summaryShown only
Colorado Department of Agriculture pesticide enforcement (Colorado)
No Orkin, Rollins or Orkin-franchise entry appears in the Colorado Department of Agriculture’s published tables of finalized pesticide enforcement actions for state fiscal years 2022, 2024 and 2025 (July 2021 to June 2025, as rendered). The SFY 2023 link on the enforcement page returned “not found”.267, 268, 269
October 28, 2026 · Complaint summaryShown only
Arizona Office of Pest Management adjudicated complaints (Arizona)
The Arizona Office of Pest Management shows no adjudicated complaints in the last 3 years for Orkin’s business license 4029 (Phoenix, with the Gilbert, Peoria, Phoenix and Scottsdale branch offices) or license 10479 (Tucson).230, 231
October 19, 2026 · EnforcementShown only
Texas Department of Agriculture, Structural Pest Control Service (Texas)
TDA warning (no penalty), case 00049517, against ORKIN LLC (Travis County license: Austin): INCOMPLETE/INCORRECT USE RECORDS; date final October 19, 2026. A warning with no penalty is recorded, not scored.261
October 16, 2026 · Complaint summaryShown only
Missouri Attorney General (Missouri)
KY3 reports that the Missouri Attorney General’s Office opened an investigation after a Springfield woman said an Orkin technician pressured her into signing a pest-control contract costing more than $21,000. The Attorney General said her office has received several complaints about the Orkin branch in Springfield and that the case is in mediation; Orkin says it is working with the customer to resolve the issue. Pending: no settlement or order yet, so not scored.263
October 11, 2026 · Complaint summaryShown only
Washington (WSDA pesticide enforcement)
No action naming Orkin, Rollins, Surety Pest Control, Crazy Frog Pest Control, Acurid, Sawyer or PNWPestSolutions appears in WSDA’s published pesticide enforcement action lists for 2019 through Q3 2026.254
October 11, 2026 · Complaint summaryShown only
Idaho (BBB Great West + Pacific; Orkin Idaho / Sawyer, Inc.)
The BBB profile for Orkin Idaho (Garden City) shows 0 complaints and 0 reviews.255
June 17, 2026 · EnforcementShown only
Texas Department of Agriculture, Structural Pest Control Service (Texas)
TDA administrative penalty, case 00049084, against ORKIN LLC (Ector County license: Odessa branch): “OPERATING WITHOUT A LICENSE”; penalty $1,000.00; date final June 17, 2026. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.261
June 10, 2026 · EnforcementShown only
Texas Department of Agriculture, Structural Pest Control Service (Texas)
TDA warning (no penalty), case 00049353, against ORKIN LLC (Harris County “ORKIN LLC #877” license: Houston branch #877): TERMITE DISCLOSURE DOCUMENT VIOLATIONS; date final June 10, 2026. A warning with no penalty is recorded, not scored.261
June 2026 · LawsuitShown only
Louisiana, Orleans Parish Civil District Court (private suit)
The owners of Fat River Farm, an organic garden in New Orleans’ Lower 9th Ward, won a jury verdict against Orkin LLC after an Orkin technician who had gone to the wrong address fogged their crops with a broad-spectrum pesticide in April 2022. The Lens reports a $332,300 judgment and that Orkin says the ruling is wrong and intends to appeal. Private suit, not final: shown, not scored.262
April 15, 2026 · EnforcementShown only
U.S. Federal Trade Commission (national; parent Rollins, Inc.)
The FTC issued an administrative complaint (April 15, 2026) and, after public comment, finalized a consent order (June 22, 2026; Commission vote 2-0) requiring Rollins, Inc. (Orkin’s parent) to stop enforcing noncompete agreements against more than 18,000 employees nationwide and to notify current and former workers. The complaint alleged the agreements typically barred pest-control work for two years within 75 miles of any Rollins location. A resolved government order against the parent about employment agreements, not consumer sales.264, 265, 266
February 12, 2026 · Complaint summaryShown only
national (Rollins 10-K)
The parent’s 2025 10-K says it faces routine claims, including representative or class wage-and-hour claims, California PAGA claims, and claims that services did not work. No specific Orkin matter is named as material.4
January 16, 2026 · EnforcementShown only
Texas Department of Agriculture, Structural Pest Control Service (Texas)
TDA warning (no penalty), case 00048983, against ORKIN LLC (Tarrant County “ORKIN COMMERCIAL SERVICES” license): FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH TRAINING OR SUPERVISION REQUIREMENTS; date final January 16, 2026. A warning with no penalty is recorded, not scored.261
December 4, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Texas Department of Agriculture, Structural Pest Control Service (Texas)
TDA warning (no penalty), case 00047921, against ORKIN LLC (Ector County license: Odessa branch): OPERATING WITHOUT A BUSINESS LICENSE and OPERATING WITHOUT A BUSINESS LICENSE; date final December 4, 2025. A warning with no penalty is recorded, not scored.261
October 27, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Solano County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-48-2025-070 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL (5237)” (SPCB branch office BR 5237); incident date October 27, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6738; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
October 1, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Orange County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-30-2026-072 (SCP), against “ORKIN EXTERMINATING COMPANY #802” (SPCB branch office BR 5681); incident date October 1, 2025; code section(s) FAC 12973; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
September 23, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Solano County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-48-2025-068 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL (5257)” (SPCB branch office BR 5257); incident date September 23, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6738; 3CCR 6678; fine $500. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
September 3, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Orange County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-30-2026-068 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL STRUCTURAL REGISTRAION for Main and Branches” (SPCB company registration PR 6199: Orkin’s main registration, “for Main and Branches”); incident date September 3, 2025; code section(s) FAC 12978.7; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
July 24, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Solano County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-48-2025-046 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL (5257)” (SPCB branch office BR 5257); incident date July 24, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6678; 16CCR 1983; 3CCR 6738; fine $750. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
July 23, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Sacramento County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-34-2026-004 (ACP), against “Orkin Pest Control (BR5640) Stockton” (SPCB branch office BR 5640); incident date July 23, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6726; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
July 10, 2025 · LawsuitShown only
U.S. District Court, N.D. Georgia (1:25-cv-03819), FLSA 29 U.S.C. 216(b) action
Charles v. Orkin, LLC: FLSA minimum-wage/overtime suit filed July 10, 2025 against Orkin, LLC and Rollins, Inc.; 30 other individuals filed consents to join. On the defendants’ consent motion, the court on Aug. 28, 2025 stayed proceedings through Dec. 1, 2025 and administratively closed the case, stating the closure is not a dismissal. The order says that if no request to reopen is made by Dec. 8, 2025, the case will be considered dismissed with prejudice. The docket shows no later entries; no settlement or outcome is shown.247
July 8, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
San Diego County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-37-2025-134 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL” (SPCB branch office BR 5260); incident date July 8, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6738; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
May 5, 2025 · EnforcementShown only
Orange County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-30-2026-032 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL #724” (SPCB branch office BR 5249); incident date May 5, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6726; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
February 26, 2025 · EnforcementUsed in licensing and compliance
Orange County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-30-2026-019 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL #724” (SPCB branch office BR 5249); incident date February 26, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6726; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
January 22, 2025 · EnforcementUsed in licensing and compliance
San Bernardino County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-36-2025-031 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL” (SPCB branch office BR 5530); incident date January 22, 2025; code section(s) 3CCR 6678; 16CCR 1983(c); fine $500. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
December 10, 2024 · EnforcementShown only
San Bernardino County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-36-2025-030 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL” (PCB 45953: a DPR license number not matched to Orkin’s SPCB records); incident date December 10, 2024; code section(s) 3CCR 6726; 3CCR 6738; fine $500. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
November 5, 2024 · EnforcementUsed in licensing and compliance
San Diego County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-37-2025-017 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL” (SPCB branch office BR 5745); incident date November 5, 2024; code section(s) FAC 12978.7(d); fine $350. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
September 23, 2024 · EnforcementUsed in licensing and compliance
Kern County Agricultural Commissioner (California)
County agricultural commissioner civil penalty, NOPA EA-15-2025-028 (SCP), against “ORKIN PEST CONTROL - VISALIA” (SPCB branch office BR 5636); incident date September 23, 2024; code section(s) 3CCR 6726; fine $250. Under $5,000 with no settlement or judgment: a minor administrative penalty.260
May 2024 · EnforcementShown only
Maine Board of Pesticides Control (Orkin, LLC DBA Mainely Ticks, Wells, Maine)
Proposed administrative consent agreement summary (file dated May 2024): the staff summary counts 461 violations: pesticide applications in 2021 and 2022 by two company applicators who were certified but not licensed with the company, plus seven label violations for spraying in rain in Sanford, Maine, in April 2022. The summary says the employees were removed and that staff negotiated the settlement with Orkin and Rollins management with guidance from the Attorney General’s office. The penalty amount is not in the summary, and the board’s final acceptance was not confirmed.259
July 31, 2019 · LawsuitUsed in sales and contract fairness
Mississippi (arbitration; Biloxi)
An arbitrator ordered Orkin to pay a Biloxi couple more than $1.9 million, finding fraud by withholding material facts in a transferred termite contract that did not cover Formosan termites.248
May 2016 · EnforcementShown only
Maine Board of Pesticides Control (Orkin Exterminating Company Inc., Portland, Maine branch)
Proposed administrative consent agreement in a May 2016 board-meeting packet: in October 2015 an Orkin applicator treated a non-customer’s home in Sweden, Maine, by mistake, without the owner’s authorization and without positively identifying the treatment site. Orkin acknowledged treating the wrong property. The proposed penalty is $1,000. The document is unsigned; the board’s final acceptance was not confirmed.258
May 27, 2014 · LawsuitShown only
U.S. District Court, E.D. Washington (4:14-cv-05065)
Orkin, LLC v. Malek: Orkin sued a defendant for breach of contract in Washington. The case ended Nov. 13, 2014 with a stipulated final injunction and dismissal with prejudice. The complaint was not read.251
August 9, 2013 · LawsuitShown only
U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (3:13-cv-05683)
Griswold v. Orkin, LLC: employment civil-rights case (nature of suit 442), filed Aug. 9, 2013 and terminated Jan. 15, 2015. Outcome not shown on the docket page.252
February 19, 2013 · LawsuitShown only
U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington (3:13-cv-05116)
Simon v. Orkin, LLC: employment civil-rights case (nature of suit 442), filed Feb. 19, 2013 and terminated Oct. 21, 2013. Outcome not shown on the docket page.253
November 18, 2010 · LawsuitShown only
Iowa (federal jury; Bettendorf)
A federal jury ordered Orkin to pay nearly $129,000 for termite damage after finding negligent misrepresentation.250
November 17, 2007 · SettlementShown only
Florida (Tampa)
Orkin paid a $2 million settlement after being accused of letting a Tampa apartment complex become infested by termites.249
December 27, 2001 · SettlementShown only
Multistate attorneys general: New York, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and the District of Columbia (no Washington, Oregon or Idaho)
Orkin Exterminating Company settled cases with five states and D.C. over termite-service advertising. The states alleged that Orkin claimed its “Orkin Foam System” would keep termites from returning, which could not be substantiated, and that its ads implied a full warranty it did not offer. The settlement bars unsupported efficacy claims and misstatement of guarantee terms, requires a “limited guarantee” or “limited warranty” disclosure on any advertised guarantee, and lets consumers with disputes under $10,000 use cheaper consumer arbitration. Orkin paid $150,000 for investigation costs.256, 257
Keep reading
- Defend Pest Solutions review#52 of 164 in the West
- Orkin review#140 of 164 in the West
- Is Defend Pest Solutions legit?Licenses, BBB record and legal history
- Is Orkin legit?Licenses, BBB record and legal history
- The Pacific Northwest pest control rankingsThe full rankings, with every factor score
- How we review companiesThe five factors, their weights and what we count
Other comparisons with these companies
- Insight Pest Solutions vs. Defend Pest Solutions
- Plunkett's Pest Control vs. Defend Pest Solutions
- Presto-X Pest Control vs. Defend Pest Solutions
- Pfitzer Pest Control vs. Defend Pest Solutions
- Orkin vs. Terminix
- Orkin vs. Aptive Pest Control
- Greenix Pest Control vs. Orkin
- Orkin vs. EcoShield Pest Solutions
- Truly Nolen Pest & Termite Control vs. Orkin
- Western Exterminator vs. Orkin
- Orkin vs. Massey Services
- Insight Pest Solutions vs. Orkin
- Plunkett's Pest Control vs. Orkin