News

When people talk about ambulance performance, the focus is usually on response times, staffing, and the vehicles themselves. But one of the biggest levers for fleet availability is much less visible: the facilities and workflow that keep vehicles prepared, maintained, and ready to deploy. That is why a recent South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (SWAST) award for “Ambulance Vehicle Preparation” (AVP) is worth paying attention to. The published notice shows a total contract value of £658,792.61 (excluding VAT), a conclusion date of 20 January 2026, and the contractor listed as T Clarke Contracting Limited. What AVP means in practice AVP is the unglamorous part of running a modern emergency fleet. It can include the space and infrastructure needed for: vehicle prep and turnaround refurbishment or fit-out work basic readiness checks managing downtime so assets return to service quickly If AVP capacity is tight, you often see it in the numbers: more vehicles unavailable, slower turnaround after maintenance or repairs, and higher operational pressure because the fleet has less slack. Why this matters to private providers supporting NHS transport Many private providers touch the ambulance ecosystem: patient transport operators, conversion and fit-out firms, fleet support services, telematics suppliers, and estates contractors. AVP investment is a signal that trusts are still putting money into the system around the vehicle, not only the vehicle. For suppliers, it also highlights how procurement can land. The SWAST notice references a framework route. That matters because framework delivery is often faster, but it places even more weight on clear scopes, practical timelines, and minimal disruption to live operations. The commercial takeaway: uptime is a system, not a line item When fleet contracts are priced, uptime is sometimes treated as “maintenance plus good intentions”. In reality, uptime is a chain: estates capacity workflow and scheduling parts and equipment availability access to bays and specialist facilities handover quality between teams If one link is weak, you lose availability. If you invest in the weakest link, the whole chain improves. AVP projects are often exactly that: targeted work that prevents small delays turning into big operational problems. What to watch next If more AVP-related awards appear, it will likely reflect a wider push to protect utilisation as fleets become more complex (more onboard kit, more diagnostics, more integration with digital systems). The “vehicle” is only getting more sophisticated, so the supporting infrastructure has to keep up. Bottom line Ambulance performance is won in the basics: readiness, turnaround, and keeping vehicles in service. AVP contracts are not flashy, but they are often where real improvements start.

ScotZEB3 (Scottish Zero Emission Bus Challenge Fund Phase 3) is open, but the tone of this round is changing. A recent industry report highlights that per-vehicle subsidy thresholds have broadly been reduced compared with the prior phase, with Transport Scotland describing this as a reflection of a more mature zero-emission bus market. Why the subsidy cap matters A lower maximum grant per bus changes the shape of a project. It pushes more cost and risk into the operator and their delivery partners. That is not necessarily bad. It can bring sharper planning and better value. But it does mean that “good intentions” will not survive contact with grid connections, depot civil's, and delivery timelines. Transport Scotland’s argument is straightforward: if the sector can deliver zero-emission buses at scale and attract private investment, then public subsidy should go further across more vehicles and more operators. What it signals for ScotZEB3 bids If you are preparing a ScotZEB3 application, treat the funding cap as a forcing function. It rewards bids that are deliverable, not just desirable. In practical terms, that usually means: Depot-first planning: confirm power availability, connection timelines, and the physical layout before you lock vehicle numbers. Phasing: a staged rollout (vehicles and chargers) is often more credible than a single “big bang”. Cashflow realism: supplier payment terms, build milestones, and drawdown timings need to match how the project will actually be paid for. Operating proof: the bid should show how duty cycles, range, and charging windows work on real routes, not on idealised assumptions. Single-operator bids: a quiet but important change One point worth noting from the coverage is that ScotZEB3 allows bids from single operators, not only consortiums. That could lower friction for smaller or more agile operators who want to move quickly. It also increases the need for strong delivery partners, because you may be carrying more of the project management and integration risk yourself. The wider context: infrastructure is now the constraint The hardest part of decarbonising bus fleets is often not the bus. It’s the depot and the grid. That’s why Transport Scotland confirming £85m for EV charging infrastructure is relevant even when it is not labelled as bus funding. It points to political and budget backing for the infrastructure side of electrification, which can strengthen the delivery case for depot projects that are ready to proceed. What to do next If you want to be competitive in ScotZEB3, focus on deliverability and value for money. A strong bid is usually the one that has already done the boring work: site surveys, power discussions, a practical timeline, and a finance structure that can cope with delays. The message in the lower subsidy caps is not “stop applying”. It’s “plan better”.

Electric scooters are emerging as a major vector for last‑mile food delivery in parts of Europe. In Spain and Portugal this year, major delivery platforms including Uber Eats, Glovo and Just Eat added thousands of electric scooters to their fleets. This deployment is more than a headline. It reflects a growing recognition that electrification isn’t just about pedal‑assisted bikes or large vans. Scooters bridge the gap when trips require more distance or speed than a bike is practical for, but still need low operating cost and emissions. The arrangement in Iberia centres on electric motorcycles supplied through a fleet management partner, with integrated battery swap possibilities via a wider charging station network. The model lets riders quickly replace a spent battery instead of waiting for long recharge cycles. That’s critical in food delivery, where downtime directly affects earnings and service quality. Electric scooters also typically have better weather protection and storage capacity than bikes. That makes them attractive for couriers handling multiple orders per shift. Free access to low‑emission zones in many cities also improves route flexibility compared with internal combustion counterparts. From the platform perspective, integrating scooters into the mix diversifies mobility. It reduces dependence on private vehicle ownership among riders and aligns with environmental targets. If demand grows and charging infrastructure improves, these scooters could become a core part of urban delivery networks. For cities, electric scooters bring their own set of considerations: parking, curb space, road safety and shared charging access. These require coordination between municipal authorities and platforms to ensure that increased scooter use doesn’t aggravate congestion or pedestrian conflicts. The trend also hints at how future fleets might evolve. Rather than one type of vehicle, a balanced mix — bikes for short dense areas, scooters for mid‑range urban runs, and small vans for large cargo — could become standard. In that mix, scooters offer a strong case for quicker electrification with real utility for riders and platforms

At the start of 2026 the UK Department for Transport opened a consultation to shape a future regulatory framework for heavy goods vehicle (HGV) CO₂ emissions. The timing could hardly be more relevant. Fleets are already considering zero‑emission vehicle purchases, alternative fuels are gaining traction, and commercial operators are wrestling with how best to plan investments into vehicles and infrastructure. The consultation is part of a broader push to phase out the sale of new non‑zero emission HGVs. The intention is to have zero‑emission vehicles dominate new purchases up to 26 tonnes by 2035, and all new HGVs by 2040. The technical detail is open to industry input, with questions on trajectories, eligibility criteria and the design of compliance mechanisms. For fleet managers, finance partners and brokers this matters because regulatory clarity affects the economics of buying and owning trucks. Without a clear direction of travel, it’s hard to tell when diesel trucks turn into stranded assets or when new technology trucks become residual value anchors. What’s in the consultation The consultation is structured around several core areas: A review of the current HGV market and emissions performance. Options for regulatory frameworks that would reduce CO₂ over time. Definitions and criteria for what constitutes a zero‑emission HGV. Consideration of how to group vehicles and set compliance obligations or penalties. Because the UK’s zero‑emission heavy goods vehicle market is nascent, many manufacturers and operators see this as a chance to shape the rules rather than react. Early data shows that zero‑emission HGV penetration is growing from a low base, and that infrastructure readiness remains mixed. The consultation’s timing, closing on March 17th, gives fleet stakeholders a window to influence how the next decade unfolds. Bio‑CNG infrastructure keeps pace Parallel to regulatory discussions, infrastructure providers are building practical alternatives to electrification. ReFuels, via the CNG Fuels network, has begun construction of a Bio‑CNG refuelling station on the M4 corridor, capable of serving hundreds of trucks per day with 100 % renewable biomethane. Bio‑CNG can deliver emissions reductions of up to around 90 % relative to diesel and can be priced more predictably, reducing operating cost volatility for fleets. The expansion of public access refuelling points strengthens the case for fleets that are weighing electrification against other low‑carbon pathways. For some operators, especially those running long distances where charging infrastructure remains patchy, renewable gas can be a bridge technology. Moreover, ReFuels has signed a multi‑year fixed price supply deal with a major UK logistics operator. That kind of commercial arrangement gives fleets predictable fuel costs over time, which simplifies budgeting and helps underwriters assess fuel price risk when structuring finance. Why this matters in practice For fleet decision‑makers this is about owning and funding assets in a transition. Understanding when to replace diesel trucks with zero‑emission units is partly a question of technology readiness and total cost of ownership. But it’s also about regulatory certainty and infrastructure availability. Regulation that clearly defines timelines lets operators fine‑tune their replacement cycles, reducing the risk of buying a truck with poor resale prospects. For brokers and lenders, that kind of clarity allows better pricing of credit and residual value expectations. It also affects how you plan infrastructure investments. Electric charging deployment and Bio‑CNG or hydrogen refuelling points are capital intensive. Knowing where regulatory pressure will fall means you can advise clients on where and when to invest versus lease versus defer. Takeaways for practitioners If you’re involved in truck fleet finance or advising operators: Read the consultation: It’s not academic. It will influence when and how zero‑emission vehicles become the norm. Model multiple scenarios: With diesel phase‑out dates and infrastructure growth paths, businesses need to understand risk and return across asset lives. Look at fuel alternatives: Bio‑CNG and other renewable fuels are gaining commercial traction alongside electrification. Factor regulatory risk into deals: Timeline uncertainty directly impacts residual values and financing terms. Clearer policy helps reduce that risk.  Decarbonising road freight is not a single move from diesel to electric. It’s a sequence of policy, infrastructure and commercial shifts. The UK’s new HGV CO₂ emissions consultation is a key piece of that sequence and worth engaging with sooner rather than later.

A recent milestone from Coleman Milne says a lot about where funeral transport is heading. The coachbuilder reports reaching its 100th order for vehicles built on the Mercedes “214” AMG Line platform, with delivery scheduled for January 2026 . On the surface, that’s just an order number. In practice, it’s a signal that more funeral businesses are treating fleet decisions like long-term operations planning, not occasional replacement purchases. Why hybrid fits funeral transport so well Funeral vehicles work differently to most fleets. Mileage can be modest, but the standards are unforgiving. The vehicle has to feel calm, be dependable, and present perfectly, every time. Hybrid and plug-in hybrid drivetrains can suit that reality: Quiet, composed driving that matches the tone of a cortege Strong low-speed control for processional work Better “future-proofing” for clean air rules in urban areas, without forcing every operator to jump straight to full electric This is one reason we’re seeing more investment in matched sets (hearse plus limousines) and consistent vehicle presentation across a fleet. Coleman Milne has also highlighted funeral firms investing in multiple-unit 214 vehicle fleets, which reinforces the point that this is becoming planned, repeatable fleet strategy. What this means for finance and replacement cycles If you finance funeral fleets, hybrid growth changes the conversation in a few practical ways: 1) Replacement timing becomes more deliberate Operators want to avoid getting caught with vehicles that are harder to use in city centres, or that feel dated to families comparing service levels. 2) Spec consistency matters more than ever When vehicles are part of a matched ceremonial set, downtime is costly. That tends to push buyers toward newer platforms with known support and predictable maintenance paths. 3) Residual value thinking shifts As demand moves away from traditional diesel, the market will price that change in. Hybrid may sit in a “sweet spot” for a while: familiar enough operationally, but more acceptable in increasingly low-emission city environments. Where full electric sits in the picture Full electric ceremonial vehicles are already a real part of the market. For example, Coleman Milne’s Etive range uses an all-electric Ford Mustang Mach-E base, showing that battery-electric can work in this niche. But the 214 milestone suggests many operators still prefer a staged approach: hybrid now, then electrification as charging, routes, and duty cycles become more predictable for their business. Bottom line The “100th order” headline isn’t about one manufacturer. It’s a marker that the funeral vehicle market is evolving fast, and hybrid is currently the bridge many fleets trust. If you’re planning your next hearse and limousine cycle, it’s worth mapping your routes, city exposure, and replacement windows now, because the best time to make these decisions is before the old fleet becomes the constraint.

A transport authority deciding to own or directly lease buses is a structural change with immediate financial implications. The West Midlands Combined Authority’s recent plan for a franchised network — including purchases from incumbent operators and a rolling five-year replacement plan — alters who takes capital risk and how zero-emission upgrades get funded. Why ownership matters Under the current commercial model, private operators typically buy vehicles and bear residual value risk. If the authority owns the fleet, public bodies will increasingly carry long-term asset exposure. That can accelerate the move toward electric buses because authorities can plan procurement to meet net-zero targets without waiting for operators’ balance-sheet cycles. But it also means authorities must manage depreciation, replacement cycles, and large capital calls for new vehicles and depot infrastructure. Financing consequences for brokers and lenders This model creates demand for different financing structures. Instead of financing a private operator’s purchase, lenders may be asked to fund transactions where an authority is the lessee or direct buyer. Expect appetite for: Long-dated debt and municipal-style borrowing against stable, contracted revenue streams Lease and hire-purchase products where ownership transfers to the authority but repayment is matched to network revenues Third-party asset managers or institutional investors providing long-term capital while the authority or a specialist lessor handles asset management Shifting residual value risk Electric buses command higher upfront prices than diesel equivalents. When an authority owns the asset, residual value risk shifts from private operator to public balance sheet or to any investor that buys the asset. For lenders and lessors, that changes margin expectations. Robust modelling of residual values for battery buses is now mission-critical. Factors to model include battery degradation, secondary market depth, and regulatory drivers that accelerate retirement of diesel fleets. Infrastructure is part of the deal Vehicle purchase is only half the equation. Depot charging, grid upgrades and managed charging strategies create large, often lumpy, capital requirements. Financing packages must bundle vehicle capital with infrastructure or create parallel financing lines for each. Where public grants plug part of the vehicle cost, financing needs to be flexible enough to account for grant timing and any tapering. Practical advice for asset finance professionals If you are advising clients in the West Midlands or similar markets, work on: Scenario modelling for mixed fleets across a five-year renewal window Structuring credit facilities that separate asset and operating risk Creating tender frameworks that make asset life and charging costs transparent Packaging investment products that attract institutional capital for long-dated bus assets What to watch next Final decisions will hinge on business case detail and funding mix. Grants, borrowing and network revenue will all be part of the model. For brokers, this is an opportunity to design financing approaches that reduce upfront cost pressures while keeping operators focused on delivering reliable services. Authorities owning the fleet does not remove commercial challenge. It simply moves it to a different balance sheet. That creates fresh room for creative, credit-aware financing that helps make zero-emission bus fleets affordable and investable.

Electric vehicles are moving steadily into last‑mile delivery, but the big question has always been access. High upfront costs can keep individual riders tied to petrol scooters. Zomato’s new rental EV bike fleet in Delhi‑NCR tackles this directly by giving delivery workers access to electric two‑wheelers without the purchase burden. The pilot programme launched with 300 EV bikes that delivery partners can rent for deliveries. The timing around World Environment Day was symbolic, but the mechanics are practical: lower running costs and reduced emissions compared with internal combustion engine (ICE) bikes. Zomato’s sustainability goals include a complete EV transition for deliveries by 2030 and net‑zero emissions for its food delivery chain by 2033. For gig workers, this model creates a clearer path to electrified mobility. Owning an EV outright is expensive for many riders who operate on tight margins. By making vehicles available to rent with appropriate support, platforms can lower a key barrier to adoption. If partners see lower daily costs and reliable uptime from EV rentals, demand should grow — which could justify expanding the programme beyond the pilot area. This rental approach also aligns with broader industry shifts. Other delivery platforms and fleet managers are focused on making EV access more approachable, whether through leasing, subsidies or shared micro‑fleet structures. From a city planning perspective, increasing the number of electric delivery bikes on the road reduces pollution and noise in dense urban zones. Adoption of EVs among delivery riders can improve resident satisfaction and help cities meet their climate targets. Operationally, platforms need solid data about performance in real use. Things like real range under loaded conditions, battery swap access and service reliability will determine whether the rental model becomes a standard offering. The key takeaway is straightforward: making EVs accessible to riders is just as important as promoting them. A rental fleet bypasses the financial risk for individuals, and could materially move the needle on electrifying last‑mile delivery.

Transport may not be the first thing that comes to mind when you think about film and TV production, but it’s a major part of how shoots actually happen. From crew vans and executive cars to box trucks for equipment and props, reliable vehicles are part of every schedule. Now, one niche transport provider is taking a clear step toward electric vehicles, and that matters for production teams thinking about cleaner, quieter logistics on set. A Practical Shift, Not a Promise Film Logistics, a specialist in providing transport support for productions, has begun electrifying its fleet with the help of a rental partner. The focus is on vehicles that routinely move people and gear between studios, locations, and equipment yards. This isn’t a future vision. It’s happening now with vehicles that are already meeting the needs of busy production schedules. What makes this noteworthy is that transport companies serving the film industry face the same constraints any fleet operator does: reliability, cost, scheduling and range. When a vehicle needs to be somewhere at 6 a.m., there isn’t room for guesswork on charge status or breakdowns. Moving to electric vehicles shows that cleaner transport can fit those everyday demands. Why It Matters to Production Teams Production transport is often behind the scenes, but it’s essential. Think of crew shuttles at dawn, equipment trucks arriving just before call time, or executive vehicles ferrying producers between stages. These movements may seem routine, but they ripple through a schedule if they don’t run smoothly. Electric vans and crew vehicles offer a few clear benefits in that context: Reduced noise: Shooting on location often means early starts. Quieter EVs make a practical difference around neighbours and local sites. Lower emissions: Productions tracking sustainability metrics can count cleaner transport toward their goals. Predictable costs: Electricity pricing can be more stable than fuel, which matters when budgets are tight. These gains don’t erase all challenges. Charging infrastructure still has to be accounted for in planning, and there’s an upfront cost premium for some EVs. But adopting cleaner vehicles incrementally, as Film Logistics is doing, shows a workable approach that doesn’t disrupt operations. Part of a Broader Trend This move also fits into wider transport and logistics trends in 2026, where fleet electrification and sustainability are becoming baseline expectations rather than outliers. Many commercial fleets are working through electrification strategies, balancing electric vehicles with conventional models as they assess cost and performance. In the film and TV context, cleaner transport isn’t about making a production look good on paper. It’s about adjusting logistics to reflect how clients, crews and communities see responsible operations today. A cleaner van on the call sheet isn’t glamorous. But it can make life on set quieter, simpler and more in line with growing expectations for environmental impact. For production managers and logistics planners, the takeaway is clear: electric transport is now practical. It’s no longer a distant goal for when infrastructure catches up. That shift matters for how shoots are run, how budgets are set and how productions show they’re thinking about the future.

Across big cities, e-bikes have quietly become part of the delivery backbone. For many riders, they’re the cheapest way to work: low fuel cost, simple parking, and the ability to move through traffic. But there’s a growing collision between what the job demands and what the law allows. In the UK, a recent Parliamentary exchange restated a key point: the Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle (EAPC) rules apply to all cyclists, including delivery riders, and the Department has previously written to delivery platforms about the issue. At street level, enforcement activity is also becoming more visible. The Metropolitan Police has described operations where illegal or dangerous e-bikes and scooters were seized as part of wider work tackling crime and anti‑social behaviour. It’s easy to frame this as a simple safety story: “illegal bikes are dangerous, so seize them.” And yes, high‑powered conversions can be risky. Speed, weight, braking performance, and battery safety all matter when you’re riding near pedestrians. But focusing only on enforcement misses what’s driving the behaviour. Here’s the uncomfortable part: the delivery model rewards output. More drops per hour often means more money. That naturally pushes some riders toward faster, more powerful, cheaper conversions — especially if a legal, compliant bike costs more upfront, performs worse under heavy use, or requires longer downtime to charge. So what happens when enforcement tightens? Some riders lose their only way to earn. Some shift to other vehicles that may be more expensive to run or harder to park. Some keep taking risks and hope they’re not stopped. None of those outcomes are great for road safety, rider welfare, or service quality. If we want safer streets, we need a practical route to compliance. That means: Clear rules that are easy to explain and check. Affordable access to compliant vehicles and safe batteries. Better charging and battery support for high‑mileage workers. Platform-level incentives that don’t quietly reward unsafe speed. This is where rental fleets, leasing providers, and employers can play a real role. If a rider can rent a compliant e-bike or e-moped at a fair weekly cost, with safe charging and support, the temptation to buy a risky conversion drops. If platforms actively promote compliant rentals and stop turning a blind eye, street conflict reduces. The core point is simple: illegal e-bikes are partly a safety issue, but they’re also a system design issue. Policing can remove the worst vehicles. It can’t fix the economics that created them.  If city-centre delivery is going to keep growing, the industry needs to make “legal and safe” the easiest choice — not the most expensive one.