New driveway rule and ban under Andy Burnham this October
Andy Burnham’s government is introducing significant changes to electric vehicle charging rules this October, promising to make home charging more accessible for motorists who do not have a driveway. However, a crucial exemption means that some households will face additional restrictions, raising questions about whether the reforms will deliver equal benefits across England.
The changes centre on two issues: the cost of electricity used to charge electric cars at home and the permissions required to install charging cables that cross public pavements. For drivers who have private off-street parking, the first measure could offer modest savings. For people who park on the street, the second could make a much greater difference by opening a route to charging at home.
But the policy comes with a significant qualification. Residents in conservation areas will not automatically benefit from the new streamlined arrangements and may still need full planning permission before installing a cross-pavement charging solution.
The result is a complicated picture for motorists. The government is attempting to remove barriers to electric vehicle ownership, but the rules governing where and how people can charge their cars will continue to depend on property arrangements, local authority decisions and the character of the neighbourhood in which they live.
For Burnham, the challenge is to demonstrate that the reforms make the transition to electric motoring fairer without creating new administrative obstacles or undermining protections for historic areas.
What is changing for drivers this October?
One of the headline changes concerns the VAT treatment of domestic electricity bills. Under the policy described in the original report, the applicable VAT rate is being reduced from 5% to 0%, potentially saving some electric vehicle owners with driveways up to £40 a year.
The precise benefit will depend on household energy use and the circumstances under which electricity is supplied. Drivers should therefore avoid assuming that every electric vehicle owner will receive the same reduction.
The more substantial change for households without driveways concerns the installation of cross-pavement charging solutions. These systems are designed to allow a cable to run safely between a property and a vehicle parked on the street, typically through a purpose-built channel or gully installed in the pavement.
The government intends to make these installations easier to arrange by removing the need for traditional planning permission in qualifying circumstances. The new arrangements are scheduled to take effect on October 21, according to the supplied report.
However, this is not an unrestricted right to run a charging cable across a pavement. Local highway authorities will still need to approve the installation, and the work must comply with the applicable requirements.
That distinction is important. A streamlined application process could make it easier for residents to arrange installations, but homeowners and renters will still need to establish whether their proposed solution meets local requirements.
The policy is therefore best understood as a change to the approval process rather than a blanket permission for every household to install charging equipment wherever it chooses.
Why households without driveways have been left behind
For motorists with private driveways, charging an electric car can be relatively straightforward. A suitable home charger can be installed on private property, allowing the vehicle to charge overnight or whenever the household’s electricity tariff makes it economical.
Labour is changing rules around EV charging (Image: Getty)
Street parking creates a different problem.
Millions of households do not have a garage, driveway or dedicated off-street parking space. Even if residents are willing to purchase an electric vehicle, they may have to depend on public charging infrastructure or chargers located some distance from their homes.
That can introduce additional costs and inconvenience. Public charging prices vary by provider, location, charging speed and payment arrangements. Drivers may also have to travel to a charging point, wait for a space or reorganise their journeys around the time needed to recharge.
For households already managing tight budgets, these practical difficulties can influence whether an electric vehicle is a realistic option.
Cross-pavement charging solutions are intended to address part of that problem. By allowing a suitably designed cable route to connect a property with a parked vehicle, the system could give some street-parked motorists access to domestic electricity prices without requiring them to own a driveway.
The potential benefit extends beyond cost. Greater access to home charging could make electric vehicles more convenient for people who cannot easily reach a public charging station.
Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the policy will depend on how many locations can safely accommodate the installations. Pavements must remain accessible, cables must not create hazards and the needs of pedestrians must be taken into account.
A charging arrangement that saves a motorist money but obstructs wheelchair users, people with pushchairs or visually impaired pedestrians would undermine the broader public interest.
The government must therefore balance easier access with clear safety standards and effective enforcement.
Conservation areas face a different set of rules
The most controversial element of the changes is the exclusion of conservation areas from the simplified process described in the report.
These areas are designated because of their special architectural or historic character. Local planning controls can protect traditional streetscapes, historic buildings and other features that might be affected by physical alterations.
New cross-pavement solutions will see drivers install gullies under footpaths (Image: DfT)
According to the supplied article, England has around 10,000 conservation areas, and the restriction could affect as many as 3.5 million people without driveways.
For residents in these neighbourhoods, the new policy may therefore offer less immediate relief. They can still apply for planning permission to install an appropriate cross-pavement solution, but they will not automatically receive the same streamlined treatment as qualifying households outside conservation areas.
The government has defended the distinction by arguing that it wants to support households without off-street parking while continuing to protect the special character of historic neighbourhoods.
There is a legitimate planning question behind that position. A solution suitable for a modern residential street may not be appropriate for a historic pavement, a protected streetscape or a location where excavation could affect important features.
However, the exemption also raises concerns about fairness. Two households with similar parking arrangements could face different administrative requirements simply because one lives within a designated conservation area and the other does not.
For residents who want to switch to an electric vehicle, that difference could mean extra paperwork, additional expense and a longer wait before they can charge at home.
The challenge for local authorities will be to distinguish between installations that genuinely threaten historic character and those that could be accommodated without significant visual or practical consequences.
A proportionate approach would help protect heritage while avoiding unnecessary barriers to cleaner transport.
Could councils create a postcode lottery?
Even outside conservation areas, the new system will not remove every potential delay. Local highway authorities will still have a role in approving cross-pavement installations.
Daniel Briggs, chief executive of Motorfinity, has warned that transferring approval responsibilities could create what he describes as a “postcode lottery”. His concern is that some councils may process applications more quickly or consistently than others.
The government expects the revised approach to reduce waiting times substantially. The supplied report suggests that decisions could take a couple of weeks, rather than the several months that traditional planning permission could require.
But those expectations will need to be tested against the experience of residents once the system is operating.
Councils may have different staffing levels, application procedures, inspection requirements and workloads. They may also need to assess the condition of pavements, the location of underground utilities and the suitability of particular charging designs.
If one authority can approve a straightforward installation quickly while another takes considerably longer, motorists may experience different levels of access depending on where they live.
That would be particularly frustrating for households that have already committed to purchasing an electric vehicle and are counting on home charging to manage their running costs.
To prevent such disparities, the government could publish clear national guidance, establish consistent technical standards and require authorities to communicate expected decision times. A transparent process would also help residents understand why an application has been delayed or rejected.
The objective should not be to remove local oversight entirely. Highway authorities need to protect public safety and ensure that pavement installations are properly designed. The goal should be to make decisions consistent, understandable and proportionate.
The wider challenge of Britain’s electric vehicle transition
The driveway rules form part of a broader debate over how quickly Britain should move towards electric motoring and what support drivers need to make that transition practical.
The shift involves more than encouraging people to purchase new vehicles. It requires charging infrastructure, electricity network capacity, affordable vehicles, reliable repair services and sufficient public confidence in the technology.
Charging access is particularly important because motorists have different living arrangements. People in detached homes with private parking may find home charging relatively simple, while residents in flats, terraced houses and densely populated urban areas may have fewer options.
If policy benefits mainly those who already have convenient parking, the transition risks reinforcing existing inequalities in access to transport.
That does not mean every household can or should receive an identical charging arrangement. Streets differ in width, pavement design, traffic conditions and the availability of nearby charging facilities. Some locations will require shared charging points or other alternatives.
But it does mean that the government needs a coherent strategy for drivers who cannot install a private charger. Simplifying cross-pavement installations is one possible part of that strategy, rather than a complete solution.
Local authorities will also need to consider whether public charging networks are sufficiently distributed across residential areas. In locations where pavement installations are unsuitable, dependable public charging may be the only practical option for some residents.
The policy’s success should therefore be measured by whether it improves access across different types of neighbourhood, not simply by how many applications are processed.
What should motorists do before installing a charger?
Drivers considering a cross-pavement solution should establish the rules that apply to their property and street before purchasing equipment or arranging construction work.
They should first check whether the property is in a conservation area and contact the relevant local authority to understand the applicable planning requirements. They should also consult the highway authority about approval for work affecting the pavement.
Motorists should confirm that their proposed equipment meets relevant safety and accessibility requirements. They should not assume that a loose cable laid across a footpath is permitted simply because the government is changing the rules.
Renters may also need to discuss the proposed arrangement with their landlord, while any work affecting shared or privately controlled land may require additional consent.
Finally, drivers should compare the likely cost of installation with the savings they expect to achieve. A lower electricity VAT rate or access to domestic charging may help reduce running costs, but the financial benefit will vary from household to household.
Taking these steps before committing to an installation could prevent avoidable expense and disappointment.
A test of Burnham’s promise to make EV ownership fairer
The new driveway rules offer Andy Burnham an opportunity to show that the government understands the practical barriers facing motorists who want to move away from petrol and diesel cars.
Reducing unnecessary paperwork and opening up more home-charging options could be meaningful improvements. For households without private parking, even a relatively modest change to the approval process could make electric vehicle ownership more convenient.
But the conservation-area exemption and continuing role of local highway authorities mean the benefits will not be universal. Some drivers may find that the new system makes little difference to their circumstances, while others could still face delays or additional costs.
That is why implementation matters as much as the announcement itself. The government will need to monitor approval times, assess whether the process is consistent across councils and ensure that public safety and pedestrian accessibility remain central to decisions.
It must also explain clearly what the rules do and do not allow. Describing the changes as a complete solution for every driver without a driveway would create expectations that the policy cannot necessarily meet.
The central question is whether the reforms will deliver a simpler, safer and more equitable way for people to charge electric vehicles at home.
If councils implement the changes efficiently and residents can access suitable installations without unnecessary expense, Burnham will be able to point to a practical improvement in the transition to electric motoring.
If delays persist and large numbers of households remain unable to benefit, the policy could instead become another source of frustration for drivers already concerned about the cost of changing vehicles.
For now, the new rules represent progress for some motorists, not an unrestricted right for everyone. The government must demonstrate that its promise of easier charging can be delivered in practice while respecting the historic character of protected neighbourhoods and keeping Britain’s pavements safe for everyone.