法團話唔得？拆解四個最常見的反對理由Committee said no? The four objections, answered

Among private estate refusals, very few are actually because the work can't be done. Most happen because the committee or management had a concern and nobody answered it concretely.

These four objections come up at almost every estate.

Objection 1: "It's a fire risk"

The most common and the most powerful, because it's about the safety of the whole building and no committee wants to gamble with that.

How to answer

Not with a vague "chargers are safe", but by listing the actual protective devices:

• Dedicated circuit and breaker: the charger shares its circuit with nothing else, and trips on overcurrent
• Type A plus 6mA DC residual current protection: EV charging can produce a DC leakage component that an ordinary Type AC RCD cannot detect. This is a charging-specific requirement
• Temperature monitoring: the unit reduces current or stops if it detects the connection overheating
• Earthing: full earthing with test records
• Product certification: CE / FCC / UKCA certificates, EMC and LVD test reports

Then add the honest part: the real fire risk is someone charging for hours off a 13A domestic socket, not a compliant installation. Your proposal reduces risk rather than adding it.

Objection 2: "I don't have an EV, why should I pay"

How to answer

Clear this up first: when an individual owner installs a charger, that owner pays for it. It doesn't touch management fees and no other owner contributes. Put this on page one of the proposal, because a lot of opposition comes purely from this misunderstanding.

If you're going through EHSS, the infrastructure is covered by the subsidy — again not apportioned onto management fees.

It's also fair to add that charging facilities in the carpark are a long-term plus for property and rental values, not a minus.

Objection 3: "There isn't enough power, it'll affect the whole building"

How to answer

This one needs numbers, not reassurance. Submit a load calculation: existing total capacity, current actual peak demand, demand after the addition, and the headroom left.

If headroom really is tight, propose load management: several chargers sharing a ceiling, with the system allocating automatically so total draw never exceeds the set value. It's a mature approach and can go straight into the proposal.

Objection 4: "What happens when lots of people want one?"

This is the most reasonable objection of the four, and the committee is right to ask it.

How to answer

Agree with it. Yes, more owners will want one over time — which is exactly why it should be planned now rather than bolted on case by case.

That's the logic behind EHSS: build the carpark's electrical backbone once, then let each owner connect to it. Framing your request as "let's start planning" rather than "I want a socket" raises the odds considerably.

Practical tips

• Written proposal, one page. Raising it verbally gets it shelved.
• Attach everything. Drawings, load calculation, contractor licence, public liability insurance — all at once. One round of missing documents usually costs a whole meeting cycle.
• Go in with allies. Three owners proposing together carries far more weight than one.
• Ask in writing for the next agenda. A written record is harder to defer indefinitely.

What we handle

We prepare the approval pack for you: layout drawings, electrical load calculations, contractor licence copies and public liability insurance, ready to submit. We can also attend the committee meeting to answer technical questions.

Being refused once doesn't end it — plenty of cases pass on the second attempt with the documents in hand. WhatsApp us your estate and the specific reason given, and we'll help you work out the next move.