Invalid Warrant Forced Entry

BarelySentientAI

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

molerat said:

The warrant clearly states it is to enter the premises, it does not mention the premises rented by, the respondent at the top is pretty much irrelevant.  The entry to the premises was perfectly legal and there is no point going down that route.  Your beef is with the supplier who gained a warrant of entry over a month after they were aware a new tenant had moved in.  Unfortunately with these incompetent energy suppliers the left hand does not talk to the right.  You need to raise a complaint with them and take it to the ombudsman if necessary, they will likely give you £200 to go away.  The newspapers may also like the story, no mentions of illegal though, just incompetent.

Thanks for that. The application was brought by the company that forced entry, presumably on behalf of the energy company. Does that change anything? The energy company are now saying it's all a bit strange and they have finding it difficult to get to the bottom of it.  The person I spoke to last almost suggested the company who forced entry went off on their own bat with this. They offered £100 that phone call.

It does - and treat the 'almost suggestion' from a random CS person as meaning nothing.

Supplier had an unrecovered debt or concern of tampering etc. and could not gain access, told a 3rd party to obtain warrant and proceed with necessary works/inspections.  Now it's off the suppliers list, they have nothing more to do with it.  Change of tenant doesn't necessarily overwrite their concerns or previous debt, so would not be an automatic trigger to change the instructions to the 3rd party.

3rd party goes through the legal process, gets warrant, acts on warrant.  They do not (and many would say should not) have contact with the tenant, occupant, landlord, homeowner etc.  They have no idea if someone has moved out or moved in, and it is essentially irrelevant to them anyway.  Only if their instructions changed would they fail to proceed.

Both parts perfectly legal, supported by the Electricity Act and the Licence Conditions.  Ombudsman might chuck you a few quid, but there are no massive errors here and you haven't suffered a significant loss that needs to be put right, so no precedent for an award over the usual £50 - £150 "shut up and go away" payment.

I'm with the same supplier, who originally told me the error was when they signed me up, someone didn't remove outstanding warrants. However, I now see the warrant was issued on August 9, 5 weeks after I moved in and signed up with the supplier on July 1. They had put a block on electricity supply which they lifted when I moved in - there was no electricity in the house before I signed up. I just find it extraordinary this may be all legal.

Again, in your pursuit of illegality you are misunderstanding the situation.

The date the warrant was issued is irrelevant.  Who happened to be the tenant of the property on the date the warrant was issued is irrelevant.  What two different customer service agents have told you (and I notice that they have told you two completely different and contradictory things, but you are treating both as accurate) is irrelevant.

All that has happened is someone at the supplier hasn't manually revoked the instructions to the 3rd party on the change of customer.  Whether they should or shouldn't, could or couldn't, might need some debate - and that's what your complaint, if you make one, should be about.

Everything here is legal, regardless of how extraordinary you find it.

Yes, they should of course have removed any outstanding warrants etc and they've repeatedly apologised. But they had a few opportunities to rectify it - they took money from the meter to pay the debts of the previous tenant, which I had to call and have rectified. The company that actually forced entry knew it was occupied and that the house was supposed to be empty. Shambolic way to use court warrants to force entry into people's homes. They shouldn't be trusted with warrants in my opinion, they clearly don't care about following due process.

Due process was followed.  Applying for, being granted, and then carrying out a warrant for entry at a named address.

You might want there to be a different process, but that isn't how laws are set.

But they are admitting they were in the wrong? That the warrant should never have been asked for.  They went to court with incorrect information, it shouldn't have happened. Sure, the system someone how allows them to get the warrant when the information supplied is incorrect and old. But that's a flaw. It's not what is supposed to happen.  I'd have let them in if they had asked.

That's completely new information that you have never given us before.

What you have previously said is that the warrant was legitimately asked for and the problem is that it just wasn't cancelled (which might not actually be possible according to some precedents) when they moved out and you moved in.

You are not supposed to be able to just go and get a warrant without due process of informing the person who lives in the property. It should all have been cancelled when I told them I moved in and they signed me up. As I live here and the property is in my name they would need to go through the process with me and name me in any court order, all afresh. They get away with it is all so they don't care - what's £100 to them if the person can be bothered complaining. But it's supposed to work this way.

Who said that they didn't inform the person living in the property at the point when the warrant was applied for?

Speculation here, but it would not be unusual for the application to have been made in July, and something sent to say "you have 8 weeks to respond".  You (according to the dates you put up earlier) wouldn't have seen that letter.

When there was no response, the warrant was issued, hence the date on it (after you took over).  They don't need to write again to say "you didn't answer, so we've issued a warrant".

They would not "need to go through the process with me and name me in any court order, all afresh"

You are confusing "how I would like warrants to work" and "how warrants actually work".

When they signed me up and I told them I had moved it should all have been cancelled. The warrant wasn't issued in the knowledge by the judge that I was living here. The information supplied to court was incorrect. Even if they were in possession of the warrant before I moved in they still shouldn't have executed it knowing I had moved in. Just they get away with it - claim admin error etc. Third party forcing entry helps here.  It's a farce really. It's just not criminal because they get a court order. Shouldn't happen though, hence they say sorry, our fault, admin error, here's £100.

They claim it's a mistake. But you can't go around applying for warrants and executing them knowing the information upon which the warrant was granted is incorrect. Or rather, I should say, shouldn't. Once they know I am living here and it's in my name that all has to go through me and be in my name. 

Imagine if just ringing up the supplier and saying "I'm now the account holder" cancelled all warrants.

What's to stop someone just doing that every 6 weeks and avoiding any access.

I didn't just say I am living here. I have an account with them at this address from July 1. I pay them bills in my name at this address. Even the energy company says they should have cancelled all outstanding warrants etc on the house when they signed me up. I think we've gotten too used to these irregularities - it shouldn't happen and the energy suppliers say it shouldn't happen. Hence they offer compensation, putting it all down to clerical or human error.

Super.  I'll run up a debt to the energy supplier, then get someone else to set up an account with my address and I'll never be able to be disconnected.  Use a rotating cast of randoms to string it out.

A random CS agent sympathising with an angry customer on the phone is not very good evidence of what a company should or shouldn't do - hence the 'compensation', which is nothing of the sort, it's a "take this money, shut up and go away" payment.

As for how often something like this happens?  Very very rarely.  Even when there was a huge investigation into fitting prepayment meters in the last couple of years (which often involves the same warrant process), there were a negligible amount of mistaken identities and address changes.  Most of the problems were PPM being used too early in the list of options.

matt_drummer

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

molerat said:

The warrant clearly states it is to enter the premises, it does not mention the premises rented by, the respondent at the top is pretty much irrelevant.  The entry to the premises was perfectly legal and there is no point going down that route.  Your beef is with the supplier who gained a warrant of entry over a month after they were aware a new tenant had moved in.  Unfortunately with these incompetent energy suppliers the left hand does not talk to the right.  You need to raise a complaint with them and take it to the ombudsman if necessary, they will likely give you £200 to go away.  The newspapers may also like the story, no mentions of illegal though, just incompetent.

Thanks for that. The application was brought by the company that forced entry, presumably on behalf of the energy company. Does that change anything? The energy company are now saying it's all a bit strange and they have finding it difficult to get to the bottom of it.  The person I spoke to last almost suggested the company who forced entry went off on their own bat with this. They offered £100 that phone call.

It does - and treat the 'almost suggestion' from a random CS person as meaning nothing.

Supplier had an unrecovered debt or concern of tampering etc. and could not gain access, told a 3rd party to obtain warrant and proceed with necessary works/inspections.  Now it's off the suppliers list, they have nothing more to do with it.  Change of tenant doesn't necessarily overwrite their concerns or previous debt, so would not be an automatic trigger to change the instructions to the 3rd party.

3rd party goes through the legal process, gets warrant, acts on warrant.  They do not (and many would say should not) have contact with the tenant, occupant, landlord, homeowner etc.  They have no idea if someone has moved out or moved in, and it is essentially irrelevant to them anyway.  Only if their instructions changed would they fail to proceed.

Both parts perfectly legal, supported by the Electricity Act and the Licence Conditions.  Ombudsman might chuck you a few quid, but there are no massive errors here and you haven't suffered a significant loss that needs to be put right, so no precedent for an award over the usual £50 - £150 "shut up and go away" payment.

I'm with the same supplier, who originally told me the error was when they signed me up, someone didn't remove outstanding warrants. However, I now see the warrant was issued on August 9, 5 weeks after I moved in and signed up with the supplier on July 1. They had put a block on electricity supply which they lifted when I moved in - there was no electricity in the house before I signed up. I just find it extraordinary this may be all legal.

Again, in your pursuit of illegality you are misunderstanding the situation.

The date the warrant was issued is irrelevant.  Who happened to be the tenant of the property on the date the warrant was issued is irrelevant.  What two different customer service agents have told you (and I notice that they have told you two completely different and contradictory things, but you are treating both as accurate) is irrelevant.

All that has happened is someone at the supplier hasn't manually revoked the instructions to the 3rd party on the change of customer.  Whether they should or shouldn't, could or couldn't, might need some debate - and that's what your complaint, if you make one, should be about.

Everything here is legal, regardless of how extraordinary you find it.

Yes, they should of course have removed any outstanding warrants etc and they've repeatedly apologised. But they had a few opportunities to rectify it - they took money from the meter to pay the debts of the previous tenant, which I had to call and have rectified. The company that actually forced entry knew it was occupied and that the house was supposed to be empty. Shambolic way to use court warrants to force entry into people's homes. They shouldn't be trusted with warrants in my opinion, they clearly don't care about following due process.

Due process was followed.  Applying for, being granted, and then carrying out a warrant for entry at a named address.

You might want there to be a different process, but that isn't how laws are set.

But they are admitting they were in the wrong? That the warrant should never have been asked for.  They went to court with incorrect information, it shouldn't have happened. Sure, the system someone how allows them to get the warrant when the information supplied is incorrect and old. But that's a flaw. It's not what is supposed to happen.  I'd have let them in if they had asked.

That's completely new information that you have never given us before.

What you have previously said is that the warrant was legitimately asked for and the problem is that it just wasn't cancelled (which might not actually be possible according to some precedents) when they moved out and you moved in.

You are not supposed to be able to just go and get a warrant without due process of informing the person who lives in the property. It should all have been cancelled when I told them I moved in and they signed me up. As I live here and the property is in my name they would need to go through the process with me and name me in any court order, all afresh. They get away with it is all so they don't care - what's £100 to them if the person can be bothered complaining. But it's supposed to work this way.

Who said that they didn't inform the person living in the property at the point when the warrant was applied for?

Speculation here, but it would not be unusual for the application to have been made in July, and something sent to say "you have 8 weeks to respond".  You (according to the dates you put up earlier) wouldn't have seen that letter.

When there was no response, the warrant was issued, hence the date on it (after you took over).  They don't need to write again to say "you didn't answer, so we've issued a warrant".

They would not "need to go through the process with me and name me in any court order, all afresh"

You are confusing "how I would like warrants to work" and "how warrants actually work".

When they signed me up and I told them I had moved it should all have been cancelled. The warrant wasn't issued in the knowledge by the judge that I was living here. The information supplied to court was incorrect. Even if they were in possession of the warrant before I moved in they still shouldn't have executed it knowing I had moved in. Just they get away with it - claim admin error etc. Third party forcing entry helps here.  It's a farce really. It's just not criminal because they get a court order. Shouldn't happen though, hence they say sorry, our fault, admin error, here's £100.

They claim it's a mistake. But you can't go around applying for warrants and executing them knowing the information upon which the warrant was granted is incorrect. Or rather, I should say, shouldn't. Once they know I am living here and it's in my name that all has to go through me and be in my name. 

Imagine if just ringing up the supplier and saying "I'm now the account holder" cancelled all warrants.

What's to stop someone just doing that every 6 weeks and avoiding any access.

I didn't just say I am living here. I have an account with them at this address from July 1. I pay them bills in my name at this address. Even the energy company says they should have cancelled all outstanding warrants etc on the house when they signed me up. I think we've gotten too used to these irregularities - it shouldn't happen and the energy suppliers say it shouldn't happen. Hence they offer compensation, putting it all down to clerical or human error.

Isn't that true, it is human error? What else could it be?

It will have cost them a fortune already to obtain a warrant and execute it when they didn't need to and shouldn't have.

I dare say they lost even more money in unrecoverable debt.

They haven't got off scot free in financial terms.

They can't undo what they have done, so I'm not sure what else they can do but apologise, try to make sure it never happens again and offer you some compensation.

It does sound like the people who executed the warrant were reasonably considerate in minimising damage.

I am not sure what other punishment you are seeking?

The real culprits are those who don't pay their bills and/or try to extract energy illegally, without them none of this sort of action would be required.

Sometimes people make mistakes, that is what makes us human.

The only thing you can do when you make a mistake is apologise and put right what you have done wrong as far as possible.

TisInNeedOfHelp24

bagand96 said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

I think we've gotten too used to these irregularities - it shouldn't happen and the energy suppliers say it shouldn't happen. Hence they offer compensation, putting it all down to clerical or human error.

But it was a clerical and/or human error.  

They say human. The person who signed me up didn't follow protocol re removing all warrants, debts, etc attached to the house. But I can tell you now they are not too concerned either way as there are no real repercussion for them. £100 is a joke for them. They have been doing this on many, many thousands of properties for years. It's something that needs fixing.

matt_drummer

I think they will be concerned, they will have lost way more than £100

And that £100 is probably more profit than they make in supplying you with energy in a year.

What other repercussion do you want, people to lose their jobs, prosecution, the company to stop trading?

What punishment do you feel that a staff member at an energy company deserves for making a mistake?

MP1995

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

bagand96 said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

I think we've gotten too used to these irregularities - it shouldn't happen and the energy suppliers say it shouldn't happen. Hence they offer compensation, putting it all down to clerical or human error.

But it was a clerical and/or human error.  

They say human. The person who signed me up didn't follow protocol re removing all warrants, debts, etc attached to the house. But I can tell you now they are not too concerned either way as there are no real repercussion for them. £100 is a joke for them. They have been doing this on many, many thousands of properties for years. It's something that needs fixing.

You are starting to lose any sympathy now as you are turning this into a conspiracy.

Warrants are required for those who don't pay bills(to change them to pre payment) and less so tampering but are a required tool. Without which all our energy bills go up more.

TisInNeedOfHelp24

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

molerat said:

The warrant clearly states it is to enter the premises, it does not mention the premises rented by, the respondent at the top is pretty much irrelevant.  The entry to the premises was perfectly legal and there is no point going down that route.  Your beef is with the supplier who gained a warrant of entry over a month after they were aware a new tenant had moved in.  Unfortunately with these incompetent energy suppliers the left hand does not talk to the right.  You need to raise a complaint with them and take it to the ombudsman if necessary, they will likely give you £200 to go away.  The newspapers may also like the story, no mentions of illegal though, just incompetent.

Thanks for that. The application was brought by the company that forced entry, presumably on behalf of the energy company. Does that change anything? The energy company are now saying it's all a bit strange and they have finding it difficult to get to the bottom of it.  The person I spoke to last almost suggested the company who forced entry went off on their own bat with this. They offered £100 that phone call.

It does - and treat the 'almost suggestion' from a random CS person as meaning nothing.

Supplier had an unrecovered debt or concern of tampering etc. and could not gain access, told a 3rd party to obtain warrant and proceed with necessary works/inspections.  Now it's off the suppliers list, they have nothing more to do with it.  Change of tenant doesn't necessarily overwrite their concerns or previous debt, so would not be an automatic trigger to change the instructions to the 3rd party.

3rd party goes through the legal process, gets warrant, acts on warrant.  They do not (and many would say should not) have contact with the tenant, occupant, landlord, homeowner etc.  They have no idea if someone has moved out or moved in, and it is essentially irrelevant to them anyway.  Only if their instructions changed would they fail to proceed.

Both parts perfectly legal, supported by the Electricity Act and the Licence Conditions.  Ombudsman might chuck you a few quid, but there are no massive errors here and you haven't suffered a significant loss that needs to be put right, so no precedent for an award over the usual £50 - £150 "shut up and go away" payment.

I'm with the same supplier, who originally told me the error was when they signed me up, someone didn't remove outstanding warrants. However, I now see the warrant was issued on August 9, 5 weeks after I moved in and signed up with the supplier on July 1. They had put a block on electricity supply which they lifted when I moved in - there was no electricity in the house before I signed up. I just find it extraordinary this may be all legal.

Again, in your pursuit of illegality you are misunderstanding the situation.

The date the warrant was issued is irrelevant.  Who happened to be the tenant of the property on the date the warrant was issued is irrelevant.  What two different customer service agents have told you (and I notice that they have told you two completely different and contradictory things, but you are treating both as accurate) is irrelevant.

All that has happened is someone at the supplier hasn't manually revoked the instructions to the 3rd party on the change of customer.  Whether they should or shouldn't, could or couldn't, might need some debate - and that's what your complaint, if you make one, should be about.

Everything here is legal, regardless of how extraordinary you find it.

Yes, they should of course have removed any outstanding warrants etc and they've repeatedly apologised. But they had a few opportunities to rectify it - they took money from the meter to pay the debts of the previous tenant, which I had to call and have rectified. The company that actually forced entry knew it was occupied and that the house was supposed to be empty. Shambolic way to use court warrants to force entry into people's homes. They shouldn't be trusted with warrants in my opinion, they clearly don't care about following due process.

Due process was followed.  Applying for, being granted, and then carrying out a warrant for entry at a named address.

You might want there to be a different process, but that isn't how laws are set.

But they are admitting they were in the wrong? That the warrant should never have been asked for.  They went to court with incorrect information, it shouldn't have happened. Sure, the system someone how allows them to get the warrant when the information supplied is incorrect and old. But that's a flaw. It's not what is supposed to happen.  I'd have let them in if they had asked.

That's completely new information that you have never given us before.

What you have previously said is that the warrant was legitimately asked for and the problem is that it just wasn't cancelled (which might not actually be possible according to some precedents) when they moved out and you moved in.

You are not supposed to be able to just go and get a warrant without due process of informing the person who lives in the property. It should all have been cancelled when I told them I moved in and they signed me up. As I live here and the property is in my name they would need to go through the process with me and name me in any court order, all afresh. They get away with it is all so they don't care - what's £100 to them if the person can be bothered complaining. But it's supposed to work this way.

Who said that they didn't inform the person living in the property at the point when the warrant was applied for?

Speculation here, but it would not be unusual for the application to have been made in July, and something sent to say "you have 8 weeks to respond".  You (according to the dates you put up earlier) wouldn't have seen that letter.

When there was no response, the warrant was issued, hence the date on it (after you took over).  They don't need to write again to say "you didn't answer, so we've issued a warrant".

They would not "need to go through the process with me and name me in any court order, all afresh"

You are confusing "how I would like warrants to work" and "how warrants actually work".

When they signed me up and I told them I had moved it should all have been cancelled. The warrant wasn't issued in the knowledge by the judge that I was living here. The information supplied to court was incorrect. Even if they were in possession of the warrant before I moved in they still shouldn't have executed it knowing I had moved in. Just they get away with it - claim admin error etc. Third party forcing entry helps here.  It's a farce really. It's just not criminal because they get a court order. Shouldn't happen though, hence they say sorry, our fault, admin error, here's £100.

They claim it's a mistake. But you can't go around applying for warrants and executing them knowing the information upon which the warrant was granted is incorrect. Or rather, I should say, shouldn't. Once they know I am living here and it's in my name that all has to go through me and be in my name. 

Imagine if just ringing up the supplier and saying "I'm now the account holder" cancelled all warrants.

What's to stop someone just doing that every 6 weeks and avoiding any access.

I didn't just say I am living here. I have an account with them at this address from July 1. I pay them bills in my name at this address. Even the energy company says they should have cancelled all outstanding warrants etc on the house when they signed me up. I think we've gotten too used to these irregularities - it shouldn't happen and the energy suppliers say it shouldn't happen. Hence they offer compensation, putting it all down to clerical or human error.

Super.  I'll run up a debt to the energy supplier, then get someone else to set up an account with my address and I'll never be able to be disconnected.  Use a rotating cast of randoms to string it out.

A random CS agent sympathising with an angry customer on the phone is not very good evidence of what a company should or shouldn't do - hence the 'compensation', which is nothing of the sort, it's a "take this money, shut up and go away" payment.

As for how often something like this happens?  Very very rarely.  Even when there was a huge investigation into fitting prepayment meters in the last couple of years (which often involves the same warrant process), there were a negligible amount of mistaken identities and address changes.  Most of the problems were PPM being used too early in the list of options.

I don't understand why you think it's all fine? The energy supplier admits it was in the wrong. Literally. Hence compensation. Imagine debt collectors just turning up and taking some poor innocent persons stuff because they have a warrant for someone else who used to live there? 

TisInNeedOfHelp24

matt_drummer said:

I think they will be concerned, they will have lost way more than £100

And that £100 is probably more profit than they make in supplying you with energy in a year.

What other repercussion do you want, people to lose their jobs, prosecution, the company to stop trading?

What punishment do you feel that a staff member at an energy company deserves for making a mistake?

I would like them to do their job properly, particularly when it comes to forcing entry into people's homes. To follow the law - once they know someone new has moved in they are supposed to cancel all warrants etc relating to a previous tenant. It's not difficult.

matt_drummer

From a legal point of view.

Compensation is intended to put you back in the position you would have been in had the error not occurred.

Punitive damages are an amount awarded by a court on top of compensation as form of punishment for negligence or intentional wrong doing.

Any compensation awarded will  be small as no damage was caused. 

To be awarded punitive damages you would have to prove in a court negligence or intentional wrong doing.

The Judge that granted the warrant was not negligent and neither were those who executed the warrant, they did as instructed.

As to whether the energy company was negligent is another matter, an employee making a mistake is not necessarily negligent, just a fact of life.

You would have to prove that the energy company did not follow industry standards in how they deal with matters such as these.

matt_drummer

TisInNeedOfHelp24 said:

matt_drummer said:

I think they will be concerned, they will have lost way more than £100

And that £100 is probably more profit than they make in supplying you with energy in a year.

What other repercussion do you want, people to lose their jobs, prosecution, the company to stop trading?

What punishment do you feel that a staff member at an energy company deserves for making a mistake?

I would like them to do their job properly, particularly when it comes to forcing entry into people's homes. To follow the law - once they know someone new has moved in they are supposed to cancel all warrants etc relating to a previous tenant. It's not difficult.

Let's hope that they do this going forward.

They have followed the law, they had a warrant.

What they haven't done is checked that it was still necessary for the warrant to be executed before it was. 

Maybe they should have, or could have, but maybe they are not actually required to and therefore they won't have been negligent.

Maybe the process has to be changed but that may come in the way of instruction from the regulator.

As far as your event goes, it is too late.

What do you want them to do for you that they haven't already done?

They have apologised, admitted their mistake, and offered you compensation in excess of any damage caused.

Do you want anything else from them?

I am sure that the staff you speak to are genuinely sorry and wish it hadn't happened, I'm sure most people would feel like this.

But you need to move on from that and say what more you want from them.

TisInNeedOfHelp24

matt_drummer said:

From a legal point of view.

Compensation is intended to put you back in the position you would have been in had the error not occurred.

Punitive damages are an amount awarded by a court on top of compensation as form of punishment for negligence or intentional wrong doing.

Any compensation awarded will  be small as no damage was caused. 

To be awarded punitive damages you would have to prove in a court negligence or intentional wrong doing.

The Judge that granted the warrant was not negligent and neither were those who executed the warrant, they did as instructed.

As to whether the energy company was negligent is another matter, an employee making a mistake is not necessarily negligent, just a fact of life.

You would have to prove that the energy company did not follow industry standards in how they deal with matters such as these.

What can I say but the energy company admit they were in the wrong and didn't remove all outstanding warrants and debts attached to the property when I moved in, which they are supposed to do. A previous tenants debts etc are not my issue. They acknowledge all this. Just they say it was an awful mistake, sorry. As you say, no real damage hence it cost them very little to compensate. Cost them more to go through the court process again or have to cancel the third party who executes the warrant. But it's still wrong. They admit it.