Fitting Pre-Payment Meters

A Warrant under the 1986 Act, brought in when payment meters came into being only allows Entry by permission of the Resident, it does not allow a forced entry.

If Utility company applies for Forced Entry Warrant

If a Tenant, Property Owner or Landlord hires a Corgi Plumber to do a full gas safety check (or electrician for electric meter) and takes the certificate to court, it stops a Warrant under the Rights of Entry (Gas & Electricity Board Act) 1954 act being granted, as the new Certificate proves there is no danger of the meter being unsafe, or being fiddled with and used to illegally extract power.

Here is the key piece of information confirming that 'debt' is not a justifiable reason for the installation of a pre-pay or as I call them 'debt meter'.

As follows:

''Except in cases of emergency, no officer shall be authorised by a [F10gas transporter] to exercise any powers of entry conferred by regulations under this section unless the transporter has taken all reasonable steps to ensure that he is a fit and proper person to exercise those powers.'']

Parts 8 & 9 of section 18 from the Gast Act 1986 :

''The M1Rights of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards) Act 1954 (entry under a justice’s warrant) shall apply in relation to any powers of entry conferred by regulations made under subsection (2) above as if [F8any reference to a gas operator were a reference to the relevant authority].

[F9(9)In this section “the relevant authority”—

(a)in relation to dangers arising from the conveyance of gas by a [F10gas transporter], or from the use of gas conveyed by such a transporter, means that transporter; and

(b)in relation to dangers arising from the conveyance of gas by a person other than a [F10gas transporter], or from the use of gas conveyed by such a person, means the Secretary of State.''

No where 'debt' is stated.

The Right of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards Act 1954) explains how a warrant once granted can be executed. The Gas Act 1986 sets the TERMS on which a warrant can be granted. So there we are.

THIS IS WHY gas/electric supplier's apply for fraudulent warrants in magistrates court's and not civil courts. There is no mechanism by which they can fit these legally. There is no caveat within the legislation for this, so they use the Section 18 Health and Safety within the Gas Act 1986 to apply for a warrant on fraudulent terms. This is entirely what it revolves around. It's all about using health and safety as a reason to access a property. This is out and out fraud, carried out on a daily basis.

OFGEM Stop a warrant:

You can get help stopping a warrant application from OFGEM,

just phone them and tell them a major debt advice charity referred you:

OFGEM EXTRA HELP UNIT - 020 7901 7295‬

Applying for an injunction

The problem with the Rights of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards Act 1954)

How interim injunctive relief can assist both individuals and businesses when locked in a dispute with their energy provider.

1. Energy suppliers may obtain a warrant from the Magistrates Court to enter a property and disconnect the gas supply. Such an application is made pursuant to Section 2 (1) of the Rights of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards) Act 1954 and is called a ‘warrant to authorise entry’. A problem with the 1954 Act is that it is limited in scope and there is no real higher court authority on how the Act is to be interpreted and applied.

2. Section 2 (1) provides as follows: -

“Warrant to authorise entry.

2(1)Where it is shown to the satisfaction of a justice of the peace, on sworn information in writing,—

[F1(a)that admission to premises specified in the information is reasonably required by a gas operator or an electricity operator or by an employee of a gas operator or an electricity operator;]

(b)that [F2the operator or [F3 any employee of the operator]], as the case may be, would, apart from the preceding section, be entitled for that purpose to exercise in respect of the premises a right of entry to which this Act applies; and

(c)that the requirements (if any) of the relevant enactment have been complied with,

Then subject to the provisions of this section, the justice may by warrant under his hand authorise [F4the operator or [F3any employee of the operator]], as the case may be, to enter the premises, if need be by force”

3. Accordingly, a warrant may be granted if the Magistrate is satisfied that it is ‘reasonably required’ to permit entry to disconnect the gas supply. There is no guidance as to the interpretation of ‘reasonably required’ and what steps a Magistrate needs to take in order to be so ‘satisfied’.

4. The 1954 Act has now been amended by the Gas Act 1986, Schedule 2B. In accordance with Section 7 (3), and (5) of Schedule 2B a gas supply shall not be disconnected where an amount is ‘genuinely disputed’ between the parties. Again, there is no guidance as to what may amount to a ‘genuine dispute’.

5. Under the legislation, there is also no automatic right for an affected party to apply to the Magistrate to stay or adjourn a warrant once it has been issued by the Court. Accordingly, once a warrant has been authorised the Applicant will then have 28 days in which they can enter the property and disconnect the supply. Time starts to run from the date of the grant of the warrant and there will be no reason why a supply cannot be disconnected promptly.

6. Accordingly, where a warrant has been granted and the supplier wishes to enforce promptly a consumer/business is faced with their energy supply being disconnected almost immediately and they are unable to automatically stay/adjourn the action. Where the property is a business premises this could lead to the interruption of their business and services. A party in this position will also generally be prevented from seeking an alternative supplier due to the ongoing dispute.

7. In Albany Lions Hotel Limited, Lions Pier Limited -v- Opal Gas Limited Opal Gas Limited had obtained a warrant to disconnect the supply to both a hotel and an amusement pier in Eastbourne. Despite representations, Hastings Magistrates Court granted the warrant and Opal Gas Limited confirmed that they were going to disconnect the supply promptly. The Claimants aver that they are owed a refund due to an ongoing contractual dispute between the parties.

8. On the basis of the existing dispute between the parties urgent interim injunctive relief was sought by [Leonard Scudder of Private Office Legal Services] and granted by Mr Justice Bryan (without notice), and Maria Mulla, before HHJ Pelling QC (sitting as Judge of the High Court), (on notice), ensured that the injunction was upheld until the civil claim in the background is resolved.

9. The urgent injunctive relief was required to ensure that the warrant issued by the Magistrates Court was stayed. The Claimants were then able to lodge an appeal by way of case stated against the decision of the Magistrate. The Claimants have also asked the case to be stated to provide guidance on the interpretation and application of the 1954 Act.

10. It is unfortunate that the legislation does not provide an aggrieved party with the automatic option of an automatic adjournment/stay of the warrant. In such circumstances, urgent interim injunctive relief may be the only option to ensure that the energy supply is not disconnected and that business services are not erroneously interrupted.