I don't know if I am being clear enough.

I accept that if the power is disconnected for normal reasons (length of time, safety, etc) and requires a fee for re-connection, obviously, no argument from me.

My point is that in the specific scenario where the power is disconnected over bad debt from the previous occupant, why should the re-connection charge be paid by the next tenant where if that debt hadn't happened that new tenant would not have had a charge to pay at all?

I guess I am looking at it like if you went to the servo and filled your car up and then went to pay, only to find an extra fee on there because the last person who used that pump drove away without paying.

The issue is the power company have a blanket policy that doesn't consider the human element of the circumstances, it is not a fair system and I would expect that a lot of people have paid for a re-connection where they probably shouldn't have normally if the previous person managed themselves better.

Yes I could chase up the previous tenant and try in vain to recoup that cost, but in reality shouldn't that be the power companies responsibility to chase up and recoup any and all costs relating to that customers power use/account including any fees related to the account being in arrears?