This situation is narrow, specific, and more common than its absence from most legal websites suggests. Someone is arrested on a warrant for failing to attend a hearing, and the first they hear of the hearing is the arrest itself.

Why the arrest can look lawful and still be a problem

An officer executing a warrant that appears valid on its face is generally protected, and that protection is deliberate: officers cannot be expected to audit the process behind every warrant. So the question is usually not whether the arresting officer did something wrong. It is whether the warrant should ever have been issued.

That turns on service. If the notice of the hearing was sent to an address you had already told the court you had left, or was never sent, or was sent to a representative who no longer acted for you, the failure to attend was not a failure to attend at all.

What to gather

The useful material is documentary and it is obtainable: the court file showing what was sent and where, any record of an address change you notified, and the custody record showing what you said at the time. People in this position almost always say the same thing at the point of arrest, and the custody record captures it.

Where a conviction or committal followed the missed hearing, that has to be dealt with before anything else, and it is a separate process from any civil claim.

How long you have to bring a claim

The free routes, before any claim

A complaint to the force costs nothing and does not stop you claiming later. If the force's answer does not stand up you can apply for a review, and across all forces reporting, 24.5% of completed reviews found the force's own outcome was not reasonable and proportionate.

The three routes, and what each one gets you.