New OZEV Grant Reality for Multi-Unit Buildings
Recent funding changes by the Office for Zero Emission Vehicles (OZEV) have fundamentally altered how electric vehicle charging infrastructure is deployed across the United Kingdom.
Previously, multi-unit residential buildings could claim the Residential Landlord Infrastructure Grant— providing up to £500 per parking space, up to a total of £30,000 per building— to offset the heavy capital costs of installing core electrical infrastructure. That critical safety-net funding has been permanently withdrawn, shifting the financial responsibility entirely onto building owners, freeholders, and private capital.
While media attention has focused on individual socket grants increasing to £500, widely framed as a positive step for drivers, this policy shift tells only half the story for those managing multi-dwelling units. By removing upfront financial support for the "pre-infrastructure" (the vital backbone of cabling, main distribution boards, and safety systems) the updated landscape presents immediate compliance and safety challenges for property leaders.
The Risk of Tenant-Led "Infrastructure Creep"
The widening cost gap between public networks and home charging means apartment residents are increasingly incentivised to utilise individual £500 grants to install their own isolated chargers. Without a coordinated strategy, this reactive approach introduces significant systemic risks to shared buildings:
Capacity Strangulation: Shared developments have finite electrical capacities. A first-come, first-served rush of individual tenant installations will quickly consume a building's available power headroom, creating an inequitable environment where later adopters are entirely locked out of charging.
Compromised Fire Boundaries: When independent contractors operate without centralised oversight, a progressive accumulation of undocumented risk occurs. Multiple individual cable runs frequently result in inconsistent installation standards and repeated, unmanaged penetrations of vital fire compartmentation walls.
Unsafe Off-Grid Alternatives: In the absence of an accessible, building-wide framework, occupants will inevitably adopt high-risk charging methods. The use of domestic three-pin plugs, trailing extension leads, and unmonitored cabling configurations exponentially escalates fire and electrical hazards within enclosed or underground parking areas.
To counter these challenges, multi-unit buildings must pivot toward a coordinated, building-wide strategy that delivers a solution both operationally safe and structurally scalable.
Evaluating Post-Grant Funding Strategies
The withdrawal of central infrastructure funding does not change the fact that consumer demand is rising; market data shows that 74% of drivers view on-site EV charging as a deciding factor when choosing a property. Property leaders must evaluate alternative pathways to fund system-wide installations safely:
1. Freeholder Financed (System-Led)
The freeholder or building owner funds the core backbone infrastructure directly.
The Advantage: Delivers long-term asset future-proofing, absolute structural oversight, total prevention of ad-hoc tenant modifications, and the structural flexibility to scale up seamlessly.
The Trade-off: Requires immediate upfront capital allocation and ongoing administrative responsibility for maintenance and network operations.
2. Resident Co-Funded (Shared Cost)
Occupiers collectively contribute to a shared infrastructure project, with individual charging units tapped into the main backbone as required.
The Advantage: Promotes transparent, shared equity across leaseholders and spreads financial requirements.
The Trade-off: Securing legal and financial consensus among all residents—especially those who do not own or expect to purchase an EV—presents extreme administrative friction.
3. Fully Managed Private Capital (Third-Party Investment)
External infrastructure providers invest the upfront capital required to absorb the design, cabling, and distribution costs, managing the network as a long-term utility asset.
The Advantage: Completely removes the capital burden from freeholders and non-EV-owning residents, while providing a safe, professionally monitored, and highly scalable charging ecosystem.
2026: The Mandate for Coordinated Action
The termination of OZEV’s multi-unit infrastructure funding marks a permanent shift away from state-backed deployment. If flat residents are denied managed home-charging capabilities, they are effectively excluded from the national transition to electric transport.
However, delaying site surveys or failing to act only leaves developments exposed to unmanaged risk over time. The EVCORE Alliance advises property owners, RTM directors, and building managers to engage with infrastructure experts immediately. Establishing a proactive, building-wide strategy today ensures that safety boundaries, load management capabilities, and property insurability remain fully protected in the post-grant era.
