What does a set-up mistake look like in a utilities connection?

A residential energy retailer's credit team approves application APP-2187 with a condition: a security deposit is required before supply starts. The set-up officer receives the approval in the work queue and opens a new customer record, CUST-90412.

The officer finds an existing party, CUST-61177, with the same name and a previous address. Matching rules say a shared surname and date of birth need a manual check, so the officer links the two records as a returning customer instead of creating a duplicate. The officer then creates service agreement SA-3340, attaches the approved tariff, and records the deposit condition as an open task, DEP-0071.

The state change is the move of APP-2187 from approved to provisioned, with a billing profile created and the meter point still pending. Two days later the deposit arrives, DEP-0071 closes, and the activation request is released to the field team.

The consequence of skipping the deposit task would have been supply starting with no security held and a first bill that disagrees with the approval.

**What it teaches:** set-up is a chain of dependent records. A useful evaluation checks the duplicate decision, the condition carried across, and the order of activation, not just whether a record was created.