Fewer than half of the UK’s rapid charging networks appear to be fully complying with the Government’s reliability rules, according to a new analysis.
A review of 38 rapid charging operators by The Fast Charge found that just 16 appeared compliant with the regulations covering chargers of 50kW and above, while 22 did not. The analysis assessed whether operators had met the 99% reliability standard, published compliance information on their websites, and submitted the required annual reports.
On the face of it, that is a concerning result for a market that is meant to be building public confidence in EV charging. But the findings also point to a broader issue. In many cases, the problem was not simply that a network had failed to hit the 99% threshold, but that there was little clear evidence for drivers to judge one way or the other.
Some operators were found to have published reliability data openly, often on homepages, FAQ sections, or clearly signposted pages. Others appeared to place the information in harder-to-find areas, including legal notices, press material, or buried sub-pages. In several cases, the review said no clear website evidence could be found at all.
That matters because the regulations were supposed to do more than improve charger uptime. They were also designed to make the market more transparent, so motorists could better understand which networks are performing well and which are falling short.
Instead, the findings suggest that drivers may still be left doing much of the legwork themselves.
Transparency is becoming part of the problem
Among the operators identified as compliant were several of the biggest names in the sector, including Gridserve, InstaVolt, MFG EV Power, Osprey and Sainsbury’s Smart Charge. Others, including BP Pulse, Shell Recharge and Believ, were listed as non-compliant because their published reliability figures fell below 99%.
However, the review also found cases where a network’s position was less clear-cut. Some operators had published figures that were said to be difficult to verify, unclear in presentation, or not obviously linked to the exact legal standard.
That ambiguity highlights another key issue. A charging network may be performing reasonably well in practice, but if it is not presenting the information clearly and in the expected place, the transparency objective behind the regulations begins to fall away.
For a sector that is still trying to win over more mainstream EV drivers, that is not a trivial problem. Confidence in public charging depends not only on whether chargers work, but also on whether motorists can trust the information being put in front of them.
No central list, no clear picture
The Government has leaned on the industry when it comes to showcasing its reliability data, despite having access to all the figures. That has created what critics see as an uneven system, with drivers forced to seek out the data from each individual EV charging operator rather than a single register.
That’s why if ministers truly want reliability rules to improve confidence in public charging, transparency has to be more than a box-ticking exercise. A 99% standard only goes so far if the public cannot easily see who is meeting it.
