EV Chargers and CPMS
Are we seeing the end of the monthly socket fee?
Article Published: Monday 13th April 2026
EV Chargers and CPMS: Are we seeing the end of the monthly socket fee?
By Fraser Koefman, Commercial Director, VCHRGD
A maturing market…
The 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’m 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as we’re clearly seeing across SME workplaces and mixed-use residential sites, this model is arguably beginning to look outdated.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.
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 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 impact is significant. In our work integrating with Tap Electric on commercial installations, removing monthly software fees has changed the financial conversation, while dependable, predictable hardware has boosted operational efficiency. This gives the site or business owner a clearer pathway to EV adoption, combined with a better experience for employees and site users.
It’s against this backdrop that installers are increasingly acting as gatekeepers. They absorb the operational consequences of unreliable, poorly aligned systems. If commissioning is complex or support escalations slow their work they will migrate to alternatives. When hardware and software providers collaborate closely to mitigate these factors and offer responsive support, installer advocacy follows.
As the market rapidly matures, earning that installer advocacy becomes a significant differentiator for companies like Tap Electric and VCHRGD.
The next phase of EV charging
The broader context reinforces this shift. We know hardware prices are under pressure. Competition is intensifying and margins are tightening. In that environment, providing operational simplicity to installer partners carries real value. At VCHRGD, we view our reliability as a means of protecting both our profitability and that of the partners we work with. When overlaid with flexible software economics then the risk reduces for everyone - including site owners and installers.
Together, we are all beginning to better align to assess infrastructure investments.
More traditional CPMS models will not disappear and will still be the right play in many circumstances. They will remain crucial in certain high-utilisation environments but workplace and residential deployments are evolving differently. These segments demand adaptability, transparency and systems that scale gradually rather than impose fixed commitments from the outset.
Over the next two to three years, EV charging will move from pilot schemes to consistent, scaled rollouts. Alongside this, support models, contract structures and installer efficiency will become even more important. The winners may not be those offering the longest specification sheets, but those aligning economics, reliability and installer experience into a coherent, flexible ecosystem.
EV charging has reached a point where operational reality matters as much as the technology or the innovation. The conversation is no longer simply about kilowatts delivered, it’s about sustainable, efficient deployment, underpinned by economic, operational and commercial considerations.
If adoption is to accelerate across the UK’s workplaces and residential developments, the industry may need to rethink not only the technology, but the economic model that underpins it
