Fancy cars for disabled people

[LemaxObsessive]

Motability.

I am sick to absolute death of seeing people saying on various threads, that Motability vehicles are “given” to us disabled people “for free”.

PIP is awarded in 2 separate elements.

1. Daily Living (day to day care needs etc)
2. Mobility

Each element is paid at different rates depending on how affected by your disability you are (and yes, medical evidence is required). However, to be eligible for Motability, you need to be getting the highest rate of the Mobility element. This is currently £77.05 per week (which works out at £308.20 per 4 weeks or £333.88 per month).

When you join Motability you agree for the DWP to give Motability that £77.05 per week instead of it being paid to your bank. If you also receive the Daily Living element of PIP then you will still receive that directly.

You ALSO, in most cases, have to pay an advance payment (AP) for the vehicle. The better the vehicle, the higher the AP. You do not get the AP back.
The £77.05 per week pays for the lease of the car, insurance, roadside assistance, tyres & windshield cover. Disabled people in receipt of the highest rate of the PIP mobility element are already exempt from road tax.

With regards to the ‘fancy’ cars such as BMW, Audi & Mercedes, as you can imagine all of these have a whopping great AP in the multiple thousands of pounds; Which as I said, you don’t get back.
The taxpayer is not paying a penny towards these vehicles besides the fact that Motability don’t currently pay VAT which I believe is up for discussion.

I think a really important point to make here is that PIP is categorically not means tested (even millionaires can claim it, provided their health meets the criteria) and is not paid to replace a disabled person’s income! In other words, people do not live off PIP instead of working, it is paid to cover the added costs associated with being disabled. Costs non-disabled people likely have never even considered, such as cleaners when we can’t do it, basic gardening when we can’t do it, extra electricity for when medical equipment is used at home, ready meals when we’re bed-bound, delivery charges for every single thing we buy because click & collect isn't possible, taxis to work because the bus always already has a wheelchair user on it, along with lots of other small but mounting costs we have zero choice but to pay because the alternative isn’t an option for us. The lowest rate of PIP is just £29.20 per week so we’re not talking big money!

Millions of PIP claimants work full time but crucially, couldn’t do so without PIP and in many cases, without Motability!

As I said above, even wealthy people are eligible to claim PIP to cover the added costs associated with their disability and they can, if they receive the highest rate of the Mobility Component of PIP choose to use Motability. If they want to spend £7,999 plus £77.05 per week to lease an Audi Q4 for 3 years then they can but not many do because it’s a lot of money to have nothing to show for it after 3 years.

So no, nobody is being ‘given free BMWs, Audis or Mercedes’ regardless of what’s being said by anyone!

That is not the point, the point is that if you can afford to self fund the top up for a BMW you should not be entitled to tax payers assistance for any car. Benefits should not be a consilation prize for being dealt a shit hand in life, they should be a lifeline for those most at need.

When my son was eligible for a motability vehicle he was 16, his siblings were 13 and 10. We paid extra for a seat Alhambra, it was one of very few vehicles that met our needs due having an extra row of seats and sliding rear doors. My husband was not keen on the idea but after driving to the showroom with all three children in the back of his vw golf and nearly vommitting from from the stress of the journey he saw the benefit.

We kept that car for 5 years by which time it was actually too small for us all to travel in at once.

Disabled people don’t live in isolation, they’re not just disabled, they have families, they still need different things from the car just as everyone else does. you might have a disabled parent with 4 children (how very dare they?). A tall person that will not fit comfortably in a Citroen berlingo. Someone who does a lot of motorway miles to visit a hospital or commute to work that prefers a diesel.

All cars on motability are sold on the market (there is an option for the user to buy it but motability ask top dollar). Cars over 5 years old start to become unreliable and require maintenance which, in terms of admin, will be very costly. There’s also the reselling. A 3 year old car can still be sold for a reasonable sum. A Dacia of 6-8 years old can not!

The cost to the tax payer for a user to have a motability car is exactly the same whether it is a Dacia or a Mercedes. Just like mps expenses, PIP is not means tested.

Generally speaking I would think people with disabilities severe enough to claim PIP are on lower incomes than abled bodied people, therefore why shouldn’t they get subsidised transport?
This whole thing is just plain envy and resentment that someone is “getting something for nothing “ as they see it.
Perhaps they’d like the disability so they can get the same?

That is the point though. People aren’t rewarded PIP for a car. They are rewarded disability benefits to help with the increased costs of being disabled. Some people choose to swap this for a car. PIP is a none means tested benefit for this reason. Why should a disabled person be disadvantaged because they are able to earn money? Do you know how expensive being disabled is to some of these people?

Right now the only way a disabled person can access a lot of services is by receipt of PIP. It’s an access benefit. David Cameron claimed DLA for his son. PIP comes with so much more than the money.

Until the government fix that and introduce a disabled register then what is a disabled person who earns 70k supposed to do? Not go anywhere because they refused to claim PIP and therefore cannot access places? Don’t be ridiculous. The first thing social services does when you need any help is make sure you have PIP. I’ve worked with paraplegics who have carers come to them 4 times a day and are still high earners. Guess what- social services help fund these carers and if they came out for a needs assessment and found out one of these people wasn’t claiming PIP it’s the first thing they’d demand they do!

I don't think one car is going to suit every wheelchair user and again, in many cases adaptations will still be needed and aren't suitable for all cars. Even wheelchair users can and do have very different needs (and different sized families).

We can be more flexible in some ways because my son is a wheelchair user but a child so obviously isn't going to be driving but his wheelchair is a child size manual wheelchair and he can't self propel or self transfer so we paid a higher down payment for lift access as opposed to ramp access to make things easier for us to get him in the car.

Other people will need cars that can fit a large electric wheelchair and/or several adaptations plus maybe a tall husband and several children.

You could make PIP like Child Benefit where you can claim but effectively not receive the money if you earn over a certain threshold. This way you still have access to all the other services that claiming provides you but the state doesn't have to pay PIP to people earning more than a certain amount. This seems to resolve a lot of your concerns?

Why?

An amputee that needs an adapted car to be able to drive it, but also has money to afford a luxury car can use the mobility funding from PIP to fund the adaptations, while using their own funds to pay the upfront deposit for choosing a luxury brand.

My uncle does exactly this. Injury at work in his 50s but built up a decent amount of savings from working for 35+ years. He wants a nice-ish car that he can afford. But needs it adapted so the accelerator and brake are hand controlled.

What is so wrong with that? The disability payment is doing exactly what they should be doing, paying for the additional cost of being disabled.

Sure!🙄

Because this assumes that the default is that the taxpayer must meet the costs of someone's disability irrespective of their ability to meet the costs themselves. We simply don't have enough money to do this anymore.

It's like child benefit. It's obvious children cost a lot of money and whilst the parents may choose to have the children, the children don't ask to be born. If you earn over a certain amount you don't get child benefit anymore. The state will assist you with the costs of raising a child but not if you obviously have enough means to meet the costs yourself.

Unless you are proposing all healthcare should be self funded, which no one wants (we've all heard stories of bankruptcy in the US from hospital stays) then yes. Absolutely the default should be the cost of the disability is state funded. It comes under healthcare.

You can plan for a child. How does one plan for a disability? Bearing in mind some of us have no idea of our prognosis

Exactly - I think people are not getting the fact that we are not saying No Motability cars . What we are saying is no fancy cars every 3 years subsidised by the tax payer! Why do they need a new car every 3 years when other people manage to work with a 10 year old car?
The system is flawed and abused..

I actually think this is a good idea.

i didn’t claim pip fir many years after my accident because I was working and didn’t need the money but a lot of places do ask for pip/DLA as evidence of disability.

It's costs the tax payer the same whether it's a Skoda or a Mercedes. The difference in price between the 2 is payed upfront by the person.

It does work out cheaper than buying a car outright as an individual, because of the contracts the car dealers will have with motability. Same as companies that do large scale deals with car dealers, it costs less.

Or are you also upset that Foxtons pay less for their Mini Coopers than you do?

Also worth noting, the Mercedes/BMWs/Audi's available on motability are not the top of the range. They are the cheapest Mercedes/BMWs/Audi's because even the 'nicer' car brands have more affordable models.

Lots of things comes under healthcare and aren't fully funded by the state in this country. Things that are much more obviously healthcare in fact than an adapted luxury car.

Take eyesight for example. Without correction I would be legally blind, yet I have to fund my bi annual eye tests myself and pay for all glasses or contact lenses that I need. This isn't really 'fair' because my sibling has perfect eye sight so she doesn't need to pay for any of this. My other sibling has similarly awful sight to me and paid thousands to have their eyes lasered. The state didn't pay a penny. The assumption is that if you have crap eye sight then you will foot the bill yourself.

Take dental care too. We have to pay for all of our dental checks and treatments. We know of the importance of dental care and how it interplays with other serious diseases and yet paying £100s for NHS dental treatment isn't uncommon. The assumption is that if you are unlucky enough to have weak teeth prone to problems then you will foot the bill yourself.

Same goes for someone needing lots of prescriptions.

To a certain extent life is a game of chance. The state can't absorb to shield us all from our own bad fortune. Some of us will need the state to do this but others of us can afford to take financial responsibility for ourselves. Of course this should be encouraged as it leaves more in the pot for those that genuinely have no other alternative than to rely on the state for all their healthcare and needs.

The luxury brands available on motability are these cars:

https://www.motability.co.uk/find-a-vehicle/cars/search-results?awardType=PIP&sort=undefined&pageNumber=2&makeName=BMW&makeName=Audi&makeName=Alfa+Romeo&makeName=Mercedes-Benz

all except two of them have a lower up front payment than the cheapest WAV (a Citroen berlingo).

personally I wouldn’t care if they were taken off motability but I’m not sure a bmw series 1 counts as a luxury car really.

Where would you draw the line? Not everyone has the same disability costs. If it goes on household income you risk financial abuse.

The average disability cost is about £1000 per month which is more than the maximum amount of pip

A similar level to Child Benefit probably. Children cost more than disability of average per month and this was seen as acceptable.

The same argument regarding financial abuse was put forward for CB but I think most people would agree that we can't just preserve all benefits for fear of this.

Tax payers should not be paying for ANYONE except towards the NHS. which actually i think should be part self funded anyway.

Again, you can plan for children. How exactly do people plan for disability? Bearing in mind my parents had no idea until I was 5 months old that there was an issue. 36 years later, I don't have a proper diagnosis let alone a prognosis

The state can't absorb to shield us all from our own bad fortune.

the above exactly!
and neither should the tax paper pay for others misfortunes.

Having children is a choice. Being disabled is not. It doesn’t matter if having kids is more expensive, we are given a choice.

I’m not disabled but I do have kids and am a recipient of child benefit but if it came down to who needed it more I would say cut child benefits over disability ones.

I knew having a child was expensive and I made that decision myself. If one day I am unlucky enough to become disabled I would hope the state I have paid into would be able to support me. Although I agree assessment criteria needs reassessing and tightening.

Parents don't always adequately plan for children though do they? Are the children just supposed to live in poverty because of this with no state assistance?

Ultimately children and the disabled are both vulnerable groups that sometimes overlap. The state will step in to help these groups because of their vulnerable nature more than they will help an able bodied adult. If however a child's parents or the disabled person is capable of supporting themself without state assistance then why on earth should we be giving it to them anyway when there are services and people in absolute desperate need of money?

The child isn't given a choice. Not all parents are as responsible as you.

You may choose to condemn children to live in poverty before you decide not to subsidise a luxury vehicle for a disabled person but not everybody will agree.

Personally I don't think anyone who is obviously capable of supporting themselves and their family should be recieving PIP or CB. There are far more urgent uses for this money.