EV Charging EV chargers and CPMS
Are we seeing the end of the monthly socket fee? Fraser Koefman, commercial director at VCHRGD, takes a look at the state of the UK EV charging market.
T
he UK EV charging market is entering a more commercially mature phase. Vehicle uptake,
driven by new models, greater affordability and used EV confidence, continues to rise, workplace charging is expanding and residential blocks are under growing pressure to better enable infrastructure. This is great news, but as deployment accelerates, more fundamental questions around how our market operates are emerging. In particular, I am having a lot of discussions with VCHRGD partners about charge point management systems (CPMS) economics and the longevity of the current, dominant market model.
For years, the CPMS structure has centred on monthly socket fees, transaction charges and multi-year contracts. In early-stage markets, that model provided predictability, but, as EV adoption broadens, as we’re clearly seeing across SME workplaces and mixed-use residential sites, this model is arguably beginning to look outdated.
Facilities managers are scrutinising ROI more closely. Early utilisation may be limited, or at least slow to build. Driver behaviour is still evolving. Yet fixed monthly fees apply from the outset, from day one. For organisations installing 10, 20 or 30 chargers, that creates a barrier, an adoption risk, and, ultimately, a financial risk.
Rethinking the economics of CPMS In conversations we’ve had at VCHRGD with commercial customers, that risk often delays decisions more than the actual hardware cost does. The question has shifted from a simple “What does the charger cost?” to “What are we committing to long term?”
Alternative models are gaining traction. Tap Electric, for example, operates a driver-first CPMS structure where site owners and business owners are not burdened with mandatory monthly socket fees. Revenue is linked to driver usage, subscriptions or transactions. That shift materially changes the business case for many workplaces and residential developments.
“Installers consistently prioritise predictability over feature lists. They want straightforward commissioning, clear installation architecture and rapid access to technical support if needed. ”
By reducing fixed overheads, it lowers the barrier to entry and provides flexibility. Access rights, tariffs and visibility can evolve with adoption, rather than being locked into static contract terms. For organisations uncertain about uptake rates, that flexibility is commercially
22 | electrical wholesalerApril 2026
reassuring, giving confidence to longer term commitments.
Reliability, and hardware, matters Software economics are only part of the equation. Hardware reliability is at least of equal importance and is often under-represented in charging economics discussions. In theory, OCPP compliance should ensure chargers and software work together seamlessly. In practice, operational reliability determines whether systems run smoothly or generate costly support noise from customers and installers alike. At VCHRGD, we view reliability as one of our core measures of having a successful, viable product. Every support call has a cost and, if unavoidable, needs to be managed quickly and efficiently. Every unnecessary site revisit cuts into installer time and margin.
Installers consistently prioritise predictability over feature lists. They want straightforward commissioning, clear installation architecture and rapid access to technical support if needed. A charger that simply ‘works’ protects both time and reputation.
Why installers are becoming the gatekeepers
Charging ecosystem alignment is becoming critical. When reliable hardware is paired with a CPMS model that reduces financial risk, the
ewnews.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
