Why are energy receivables different from ordinary B2B claims?

The fundamental difference starts with the structure of the contract itself. In the case of electricity supply, we most often deal with a comprehensive agreement—combining in one document the sale of energy and the distribution service provided by the distribution system operator. This is important when pursuing receivables: the two components of the invoice have different creditors (the seller and the DSO), although the debtor often treats them as a single payment.

Another special feature is the regulated tariff. Distribution rates and network charges are approved by the President of the Energy Regulatory Office. A debtor wishing to challenge the amount due must contend with the fact that a tariff approved by the ERO is administrative in nature—it is not negotiable, and challenging it in a civil court is, as a rule, ineffective. This strengthens the creditor’s position: while the amount of energy consumed may be disputed (for example, issues concerning meter readings or subtenants), the rate itself is fixed.

Step 1: a demand for payment—not a formality, but a tool

Many creditors treat a demand for payment as an unpleasant formal obligation. In reality, a well-drafted demand serves several functions at once.

First, it initiates the accrual of statutory interest for late payment in commercial transactions—if the invoice deadline has already passed, interest runs from the following day without any additional action, but the demand documents the point from which the debtor was formally called upon to pay.

Second, the demand for payment can call on the debtor to pay compensation for the costs of recovering receivables. In relations between businesses, the creditor is entitled to compensation of between EUR 40 and EUR 100, depending on the amount of the claim stated in the invoice for which payment was late. With a dozen or several dozen invoices issued to one debtor, this can add up to an amount that should not be ignored.

Third, the demand defines the scope of the claim. It identifies the overdue invoices, the interest charged and the deadline by which payment is expected. This limits the scope for later procedural disputes about “what exactly was being demanded”.

Step 2: order-for-payment proceedings—when and why they are worthwhile

If the debtor does not respond to the demand, the next step is court proceedings. In cases concerning payment for energy supplied, the creditor has several procedures to choose from, but order-for-payment proceedings—provided the formal requirements are met—are by far the most advantageous.

Why? Because an order for payment issued in order-for-payment proceedings constitutes security for the claim as soon as it is issued. Even before the debtor learns about the case and potentially files objections, the creditor may apply for security for the claim—for example, by having the debtor’s bank account seized. This makes it practically impossible to move funds out of the company while awaiting the outcome of the case.

Another advantage is the cost: the court fee in order-for-payment proceedings is only one quarter of the proportional fee the creditor would pay in ordinary proceedings. The saving is substantial, especially for higher amounts.

An order may be issued only on the basis of the grounds exhaustively listed in the statute, namely where the claim has been proven by an official document, the creditor holds an account accepted by the debtor, or a demand for payment accompanied by the debtor’s written statement acknowledging the debt. Thus, the legislature requires the claim to be undisputed or to arise from a document that the court considers sufficient evidence for issuing an order.

Suspension of supplies—the operator’s tool

It is worth noting that suspending energy supplies is not a tool available to a seller collecting its own receivables. Under Article 6b of the Energy Law, this power belongs exclusively to a transmission or distribution company, which may suspend the supply of energy in two cases: where an inspection has revealed illegal consumption of energy, or where the customer has been at least 30 days overdue after the payment deadline.

For the seller, this means that it can at most notify the operator of the customer’s arrears; it does not itself have this mechanism at its disposal. A DSO’s breach of the statutory conditions may, however, result in its liability for damages toward the customer, which is of practical importance: an improper suspension of supplies, instead of motivating the debtor, may give the debtor a counterclaim.

Limitation periods—three years that pass quickly

Claims arising from the sale of electricity become time-barred, as a rule, three years after the invoice becomes due. This is the general period for claims connected with conducting business activity. It sounds like a long time, but in practice arrears can accumulate for many months (particularly in housing cooperatives and communities, where debt collection proceeds slowly), and three years may pass before the creditor decides to take legal action.

Beware of the trap: after a final judgment or order for payment has been obtained, the limitation period starts running anew and is six years. However, in the case of awarded interest, its limitation period is also three years. This is important because bailiff enforcement may last for years, and a creditor who forgets about an enforcement title it has obtained may lose the ability to effectively pursue the receivable in the future. In the event of ineffective enforcement, it is recommended to apply to restart it every three years so that the interest and the principal claim do not become time-barred.

When professional legal support is worth seeking

Collecting energy invoices independently is possible when the matter is straightforward: one debtor, several invoices and no dispute concerning the account balance. In more complex cases—when the debtor contests the accuracy of meter readings, challenges the authority to conclude a comprehensive agreement, disputes the tariff amount, or the debtor is undergoing restructuring proceedings—the effectiveness of recovering the receivable without a lawyer’s support drops sharply.

This applies in particular to cases where an energy receivable intersects with corporate law issues (e.g. the management board’s liability for arrears or ownership changes during debt collection) or proceedings before the President of the ERO in regulatory disputes. Law firms specializing in energy law combine knowledge of sector-specific regulations with civil procedure, which has real value in this type of case.

Summary

Debt collection for electricity is a process that, when conducted properly, is considerably more predictable than debt collection in other industries. Regulated tariffs, clear procedural rules and the availability of order-for-payment proceedings give the creditor relatively strong tools. The key points are:

  • A properly worded demand for payment with a complete list of arrears and compensation calculated for the costs of recovering receivables;
  • Choosing the appropriate court procedure—order-for-payment proceedings where the evidence permits it, and payment-order or ordinary proceedings in other cases;
  • Filing an application for security if the creditor has initiated proceedings other than order-for-payment proceedings;
  • Monitoring limitation periods—particularly when arrears accumulate slowly;
  • Following the procedure in the event of a possible suspension of supplies.

Neglecting any of these elements does not eliminate the chance of recovering the debt, but it may significantly prolong and complicate the entire process.