[Paul_Moxhay]

Following on from the thread on Ecotricity funding I feel it is time that we asked OLEV officially for the information we all feel we have the right to know... where is our money, taxpayers money, going as far as OLEV grant funding is concerned.

I have never done an FOI request before and so I will have to do a bit of research first so it won't be tomorrow but over the next few days I will research it and try to formulate some sensible wording for the request. Hopefully I should have something formulated by early next week.

FOI requests are usually responded to within 20 days so it will take a little while but we will then have the official response. Whether we believe their response is another matter altogether but at least we will have it

If anyone wishes to chip in as to what we should be asking then please... I am open to all suggestions.

It is about time we stopped mucking around and pissing in the dark... we need the facts. Will we get facts? Who knows but we have to try.

 

[brothersoulshine]

I'm pretty new to all of this. Perhaps if you explained why you felt the need to do an FOI request on OLEV to a n00b such as me then it would help us to refine the question?

 

[Paul_Moxhay]

Sure.

OLEV is guardian to a lot of our money. Hundreds of millions is being handed out in the name of supporting EV take-up. Some of it is obvious where it goes - for example, every car sold that is on the eligibility list get a 25% grant up to £5000. But a lot of it goes towards installation of charging infrastructure. How much and to whom is the issue.

OLEV claim to be sensible trustees in that they claim to do due diligence before handing out grant monies and they claim that once money is granted they ensure that the charging infrastructure towards which it contributes is properly managed, maintained and made to be available for EV drivers to use. There is clear evidence to the contrary; many charging stations that are almost certainly paid for to a greater or lesser extent by grants are left unserviceable for months, or even years, and are not properly managed.

Moreover, the public money that is granted for infrastructure seems not to be under the control or management of OLEV. They seem to hand the money out and then forget about follow up to ensure that the money was actually wisely spent.

I want to find out where our taxpayers money has gone, to which companies, how much and what it paid for. I'd like to know what oversight OLEV is exercising over those assets paid for by public money.

It also seems to me that grant money paid in this way pays for assets which are no longer publicly owned and which then go onto the balance sheet of the companies which receive it. I want to know what procedures are not only in place but that are actually being implemented, to ensure that the public gets proper value for money from those assets and that they are not just coming out of the government coffers straight into the pockets of directors and shareholders of private companies claiming the grants.

I hope that is an adequate explanation

 

[brothersoulshine]

Certainly is, thank-you. Sounds like the kind of mess that Private Eye would be all over.

 

[Paul]

Sure.

OLEV is guardian to a lot of our money. Hundreds of millions is being handed out in the name of supporting EV take-up. Some of it is obvious where it goes - for example, every car sold that is on the eligibility list get a 25% grant up to £5000. But a lot of it goes towards installation of charging infrastructure. How much and to whom is the issue.

Is that first part really "obvious"? Just because we see a £5k price cut, how much money actually changes hands, there's admin and maybe sweeteners invoked too? Consumer gets £5k off, but what does the dealer, manufacturer and other parties get?

Even the simple stuff is complicated.

 

[Paul_Moxhay]

Yup... it obvious to me... if someone buys a new EV on the list then it is the purchaser that gets the money discounted off the new price.

The fact that the manufacturer has increased the price artificially by the same amount is not relevant as the money still comes off the purchase price.

In my opinion, as you also probably believe, the New Car Grant is a subsidy to the manufacturer and I believe that the government (OLEV) intended the money to go to the manufacturer but we will probably never prove that one and I am not going to try.

 

[Matt Beard]

Be aware that an FOI request can be turned down due to it including "commercially sensitive data". Be prepared for this response!

 

[Paul]

Be aware that an FOI request can be turned down due to it including "commercially sensitive data". Be prepared for this response!

I think you can challenge that through the courts if you have the time, inclination and wealth to do so. (?!)

 

[Ajl0ckwood]

Another consideration is if you make the FOI to complicated they can turn it down due to the unreasonable cost to gather the information.

The easiest way is to ask all the questions above informally and then FOI the ones they don't answer

 

[brian orr]

Sure.

OLEV is guardian to a lot of our money. Hundreds of millions is being handed out in the name of supporting EV take-up. Some of it is obvious where it goes - for example, every car sold that is on the eligibility list get a 25% grant up to £5000. But a lot of it goes towards installation of charging infrastructure. How much and to whom is the issue.

OLEV claim to be sensible trustees in that they claim to do due diligence before handing out grant monies and they claim that once money is granted they ensure that the charging infrastructure towards which it contributes is properly managed, maintained and made to be available for EV drivers to use. There is clear evidence to the contrary; many charging stations that are almost certainly paid for to a greater or lesser extent by grants are left unserviceable for months, or even years, and are not properly managed.

Moreover, the public money that is granted for infrastructure seems not to be under the control or management of OLEV. They seem to hand the money out and then forget about follow up to ensure that the money was actually wisely spent.

I want to find out where our taxpayers money has gone, to which companies, how much and what it paid for. I'd like to know what oversight OLEV is exercising over those assets paid for by public money.

It also seems to me that grant money paid in this way pays for assets which are no longer publicly owned and which then go onto the balance sheet of the companies which receive it. I want to know what procedures are not only in place but that are actually being implemented, to ensure that the public gets proper value for money from those assets and that they are not just coming out of the government coffers straight into the pockets of directors and shareholders of private companies claiming the grants.

I hope that is an adequate explanation

Proposals like this demonstrate the risks of handing EV community leadership to people like yourself and Kevin!

One crazy action like this will ensure the EV 'community' is excluded from becoming 'EV stakeholders' - for a very long-time indeed. You've started PiB and appointed yourselves a community leaders and then you are going to confront OLEV with a demand to know their financial policies and procedures! You might as well take a parcel-bomb and leave it in Downing Street.

Your attitudes to addressing companies and government agency may be OK for private individuals - but you are no longer private individuals. This proposal, as you have outlined it, will never succeed - but if it did, you would never get to the negotiating table to change things.

You have taken no cognisance of the ongoing work towards achieving EV community 'accreditation' - a place in the inner circle of information exchange and the ability to influence future policy. Which does neither of you any credit at all - but it is ongoing.

I gave my support to PiB (by PM) because I felt your energies and commitment needed to be harnessed and directed. However, what we are seeing here is exactly why you cant fit into an existing members' framework' - you are demonstrating that it has to be your way - whatever the cost.

IMO PiB representation has to be regulated and only valid and credible initiatives taken. This proposal is neither!

 

[Paul_Moxhay]

Lol!

I used to just set you to IGNORE on the forum but it is posts like that one that reminds me just how entertaining you are Brian. I wouldn't want to miss out on that now would I?

Whether you support Plug in Britain our not is actually irrelevant... The more you post the less important you become.

Keep posting Brian...it keeps us all entertained

Oh, forgot to say... yet again you confuse my actions with those on behalf of Plug in Britain. Get you act together Brian.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

@brian orr if you read the OP you'll see that @Paul_Churchley never mentioned PIB and is undertaking the FOI as a concerned taxpayer. I do not believe PIB has a policy on this issue today.

I have to say that your general approach is so old school that I could not possibly support it nor by implication EVDA who you represent. I think your post represents everything that is wrong with our political system

 

[Hoa Tu]

One crazy action like this will ensure the EV 'community' is excluded from becoming 'EV stakeholders' - for a very long-time indeed.

That's right just keep toeing the line and stop asking awkward questions. No need for transparency here honest guv.

 

[fenlander]

One crazy action like this will ensure the EV 'community' is excluded from becoming 'EV stakeholders'

Far far from it. Transparency is exactly what is needed, then we can move on from all the guessing and assumptions and hopefully start to support the various businesses in this area.

I find it disappointing that people seem to wish to preserve the 'inner circle' of communication.

 

[Paul_Moxhay]

@brian orr if you read the OP you'll see that @Paul_Churchley never mentioned PIB and is undertaking the FOI as a concerned taxpayer. I do not believe PIB has a policy on this issue today.

Kevin is correct. My actions in this matter is not on behalf of PIB and is just me wanting to get more information on where and how our taxpayer's money is spent. I can see nothing negative in this at all and in fact, the OLEV web site has a link on its front page for FOI requests so even they encourage it!

 

[SteepJim]

Oh dear! Personalities again instead of issues.
The capacity of the human brain to view a statement from the wrong end of the telescope will never cease to amaze me. We are all on the same side, we just happen to bat with different styles.

 

[Paul_Moxhay]

I have to be honest guys and gals... I am completely and totally fed up with it. If it isn't me fighting with Kevin, then it's Kevin fighting with someone, or it's Brian chipping in and Kevin and I arguing with him. It is pathetic.

FFS! We can't even discuss Ecotricity... by far the very best of all the charging network providers, without Kevin having a dig at them.

I am banned from Leaf Talk, don't speak to Nikki Gordon-Bloomfield. It just makes me so sad.

I am starting to ask myself... why am I putting in so much effort and not an insignificant amount of money already when I seem destined to always argue with people? Do I really want this amount of hassle, disharmony and unfriendliness?

Brian is wrong about most things IMO but perhaps he is right in one respect but for different reasons... I am not sure I am the right person for PIB.

 

[Mike McL]

Proposals like this demonstrate the risks of handing EV community leadership to people like yourself and Kevin!

One crazy action like this will ensure the EV 'community' is excluded from becoming 'EV stakeholders' - for a very long-time indeed. You've started PiB and appointed yourselves a community leaders and then you are going to confront OLEV with a demand to know their financial policies and procedures! You might as well take a parcel-bomb and leave it in Downing Street.

Your attitudes to addressing companies and government agency may be OK for private individuals - but you are no longer private individuals. This proposal, as you have outlined it, will never succeed - but if it did, you would never get to the negotiating table to change things.

You have taken no cognisance of the ongoing work towards achieving EV community 'accreditation' - a place in the inner circle of information exchange and the ability to influence future policy. Which does neither of you any credit at all - but it is ongoing.

I gave my support to PiB (by PM) because I felt your energies and commitment needed to be harnessed and directed. However, what we are seeing here is exactly why you cant fit into an existing members' framework' - you are demonstrating that it has to be your way - whatever the cost.

IMO PiB representation has to be regulated and only valid and credible initiatives taken. This proposal is neither!

We'll done Brian, I agree with you. Maybe I will be sent to Coventry too. Being angry may be alright on the this forum, but it's no way for an adult to behave.

 

[Ajl0ckwood]

The problem is there are to many egos and to many vested interests.

Want ever you do WILL be wrong.

 

[Mike McL]

Have you seen

http://www.ippr.org/assets/media/images/media/files/publication/2013/04/leading-the-charge_ULEVs_Apr2013_10620.pdf