Government and judge back secretive courts for warrants to break into homes

Senior judges and Ed Miliband’s Government department have come out in support of a secretive court system where magistrates blindly rubber-stamp warrants for utility companies to break into people’s homes.

Energy firms including British Gas, Scottish Power, and OVO Energy, were embroiled in a scandal in 2022 and 2023 when it emerged that tens of thousands of pre-payment meters had been forcibly fitted in homes around the UK.

Vulnerable people and poverty-stricken families were being affected, and the then-Conservative government paused the practice amid a public outcry.

Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring drew up new rules in 2024 to try to toughen up the process of applying for a warrant, but expressly allowed that magistrates could continue to take decisions in private, rather than in open court.

Late last year, it emerged that magistrates are approving batches of warrants, including for the fitting of pre-payment meters, based on written evidence that they have never seen.

Now, Judge Goldspring and the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr have backed the existing court system, while the Government has signalled that it supports the current arrangements.

Simon Francis, the coordinator for the End Fuel Poverty Coalition campaign group, urged the Government to change the law with the upcoming Energy Independence Bill, expected to form part of the next King’s Speech, to “remove the threat of forced prepayment meters for households unable to pay their energy bills”.

He said: “Court cases involving vulnerable energy customers are still being heard behind closed doors and decided in bulk.

“If the Chief Magistrate does not see a problem with this, then it is time for ministers to act.”

Under Judge Goldspring’s rules, which were implemented in April 2024, energy firms were told they must give at least 10 days’ notice to a property occupier of a warrant being applied for, make at least 10 attempts to contact someone before asking a court to approve the fitting of a prepayment meter, and only go to court once a month had passed since the last bill went unpaid.

At a private court session at Uxbridge Magistrates’ Court in November 2024, when a member of the press was granted rare access, an agent for a debt recovery company put forward the names and addresses of more than 100 properties where a warrant for forced entry was being sought.

The magistrate picked 10 applications to scrutinise in detail, and two failed to meet Judge Goldspring’s legal tests relating to warning the occupiers about a possible warrant.

The debt agency withdrew those two applications, two further applications were selected and passed the tests, and the magistrate then rubberstamped the whole batch of warrants without investigating if the failures to adhere to the law were more widespread that the two failed applications.

The court itself had no access to the underlying evidence supporting each application, and relied solely on the word of the debt agent who dialled in for the court hearing over the phone.

Judge Goldspring conducted a review of the system, and concluded that the law does not dictate that magistrates must assess utility warrant applications in public.

Turning to the way warrants are being approved, he said the courts “do not independently verify information presented to them”.

“The judicial function is confined to adjudicating upon the material brought before the court, rather than conducting independent investigations,” he continued.

“Similarly, the court is not a regulatory body scrutinising the operational practices; its role is limited to determining whether legal requirements have been met and whether access is reasonably required to exercise a pre-existing right of entry.”

The senior judge said questions about the secrecy that surrounds the utility warrant application process should be directed to the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero, led by Ed Miliband, which controls legislation first introduced in the 1950s.

The department did not answer when asked by the Press Association if there are any plans for changes to the existing system.

But when questioned if the Government supported the current arrangements, a spokesperson offered no notes of concern about the “standard procedure” the courts are following.

“We expect suppliers and their representatives to comply with strict rules on applying for prepayment meters,” a spokesperson said.

“Vulnerable people must never be targeted and every single case brought must be given opportunity to be challenged in court.

“The granting of warrants, where uncontested, follows standard procedure and allows for media attendance while preserving sensitive information.”

At her annual press conference in March, Baroness Carr supported the conclusions of the Chief Magistrate, and said that magistrates are “applying the law as it exists”.

The Ministry of Justice says that journalists can be granted access to uncontested warrant application hearings when they are conducted in private and over an MS Teams link.

But the courts do not provide any information to the public or the media about the hearings, or give any advanced warning that a batch of warrants are being sought.

Responding to the reporting of the issue in January, Ofgem said it is “closely monitoring” energy firms to ensure they are complying with the rules.

The End Fuel Poverty Coalition pointed out that Ofgem is still engaged in a long-running investigation into British Gas in the wake of the pre-payment meter scandal.

Mr Francis said: “The forthcoming Energy Independence Bill, expected in the King’s Speech, must include provisions that significantly reform the court processes introduced in the 1950s or enable ministers to remove the threat of forced prepayment meters for households unable to pay their energy bills.

“Households in energy debt are not there through choice, they are struggling because of five years of sky-high energy costs and an oil and gas industry generating extraordinary profits that ultimately end up on people’s bills.”