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!

Yes I think professional evidence would be needed. I think you would have to be pretty consistent and have done pretty thorough research. Writing a journal etc would also help.

My mum is 92 yrs old and has a motobility car that my lazy half brother takes full advantage of. I have no idea how the benefits system works but I do know she was on DLA and was switched over to PIP when it came in. Maybe it's the same scenario for the poster with the 80yr old Grandma? Either way she,or should I say my lazy grifter of a half brother has had a motobility car for years now. And no,this isn't some 'random shit' I just made up.

Has your mum also got a lifetime (which don't exist) high rate of pip because her knee hurts to as that is what other poster was saying

Agree. If anyone out there would like to swap places with my husband ,he would gladly swap a new car for a 29 year old one and the proper use of his legs again...

I admit that I haven’t read through all the pages of this thread so apologies if this has already been covered.
But is it true that if someone gets Attendance Allowance, basically the retired version of the working age PIP, it isn’t a qualification for Motobility, even though they have the same very physical disability of being unable to walk even a few yards?

It's not just eye contact, how does a person present, ie dressed how is their ,speech, do theu appear agitated ,under the influence if any alcohol, substances ,are they tearful lots of things ,to keep up the pretence for a long period of time would tske some doing
You cant just go off what a person says to you .

Yeah you can't get motability with AA

Yes.

Attendance Allowance doesn't have a mobility rate but PIP and DLA does and it is the mobility rate that qualifies someone for Motability.

There’s always going to have to be a small level of tolerance for fraud or the benefit wouldn’t be able to exist at all and yes people would suffer but I don’t agree that it means that it isn’t right to try to do more to reduce it or that the figure people so readily throw around claiming that fraud is near non existent is accurate because it is obvious that at present we do not have the funds or manpower to really investigate the problem. But that imo also means stop bothering people whose circumstances will literally not change. What is the point of harassing them? Staff are better used elsewhere than focusing on someone whose leg won’t grow back or whose brain injury is always going to cause severe impairment.

And yes I agree with the poster who said that reducing waiting lists so that fewer/less severe disabilities result ,should be a priority as sometimes you do have to spend money to save it.

I agree with that last part but how do you make pip harder as it is really hard to get already

It’s difficult but not impossible and I don’t have precise answers but fraud absolutely is possible and yes it goes on, in spite of how many people on MN insist that it isn’t doesn’t. Sweden and some other countries make more use of surveillance for disability benefits as is often done for insurance claims so that may be a possibility here. Streamlining the process may help, it takes too long so that a lot of man hours are wasted that could be put to use elsewhere and being more consistent may help too as some seem to be accepted with less evidence than others(Speaking from experience filling in the forms for others as part of CAB) That was certainly the case for a relative of mine who had someone who knew exactly what to say and exaggerated it on the form. She was not asked for a face to face assessment or even a telephone one. She was not nearly as severely disabled as she made out. She did not need or use the money. It went to her daughter in Canada in the end when she died. And I was her POA here so I knew every detail of her life , medical records and finances once she developed dementia(Not why she received disability benefits)

So yes the majority of claimants are genuine but fraud also absolutely exists and should be tackled even though I acknowledge that a certain level of tolerance for fraud will always have to exist.

I’m that poster.

I too, have no idea how the benefits system works, but the situation sounds similar. I know that my grandmother was on DLA in the past at some point but I have no idea what her current situation is. Why should I.

I can only assume she switched over to PIP at some point or has a lifetime award for DLA.

The only reason I posted on this thread is because I have personal experience of the Motability scheme in that my cousin drives a car which was awarded to my grandmother. This car is in no way used for the benefit of my grandmother. It is for all intents and purposes, my cousin’s car. Luckily, my grandmother is incredibly fit, active and independent for her age, so she doesn’t need to be driven around in it. She is absolutely in no way disabled.

I have been a member of Mumsnet for a long time, and post here fairly regularly. Why I would just make up some “random shit”, admitting to benefit fraud in my own family, I have no idea.

We all have our own experiences and stories. I haven’t questioned anyone on this thread about theirs. It’s a shame that I’ve not been afforded the same courtesy. I wouldn’t dream about following other posters around the thread, laughing at them and accusing them of lying about their disabilities, so I don’t know why anyone thinks it’s a perfectly acceptable way to behave towards me.

People actually laughing at the fact that someone in their early 80s could be fit, active and independent is, quite frankly, bizzare.

@Vivi0 I have no desire to follow anyone around threads, accusing them of anything. I did question in an earlier post however, why your Grandmother, who you have said yourself is not severely disabled, or indeed disabled, would have been awarded HRM in the first place. It is a perfectly normal question to ask. It is certainly not a laughing matter, imo.

That hardly seems fair. So someone who never claimed PIP but became severely disabled soon after retiring can’t get access to the scheme. My dad is in this situation. He lives very remotely in Cumbria, no bus service at all, has a driving licence but can barely walk due to arthritis & a previous injury. He has just his state pension & a very tiny private pension that takes him just two pounds over the claim threshold for pension credit. So he has a very small fifteen year old car just to be able to get to the local shop & doctor. He has recently been granted AA but the motobility scheme would be a bonus he can’t get. And he would not be buying posh cars just glad of the help with running a small car.

For whatever reason, it is what the Motability charity has decided. Maybe if AA was expanded to have a mobility rate they would reconsider.

I was pretty much called a liar at my assessment. I was told that my medical reports were fake, I've grown out of my hearing impairment (which is physically impossible) and there's no reason why I can't drive and I've chosen not to.

At the time I was on medication which affected my concentration and would have made driving unsafe for me and people around me

I've never passed the eye test for driving. A good day corrected is 2 lines with one eye and 3-3.5 with the other. Whilst you can be blind in one eye, you need to be able to read a lot more than 3.5 lines

And she asked what one of my diagnosed was and then decided it wasn't that bad and I don't need the therapy I'd been referred for

She did claim I'd made eye contact. I don't know how anyone knows what I'm looking at when my eyes constantly shake and my glasses are heavily tinted

I don’t know the answer to that question.

I did say that she does have some pain in her knees, for which she is prescribed pain medication, however, it doesn’t interfere with her everyday life, and it certainly wouldn’t explain her past DLA award.

Another poster did contribute to the thread saying that her in line of work, she did encounter many older people in my grandmother’s position, who had been in receipt of DLA from when it was much easier to claim 30 odd years ago, and who now found themselves with lifetime awards with no reassessments. I assume that is also her situation.

I did explain this but again, was told I was full of shit.

Why are there so many posters saying "I don't know how the benefits system works tinkly laugh but I know x, y, z is doing a fraud"

If you don't know how the benefits system works but you want to participate in discussions about it, learn. Read about the process. Read about people's experiences. Look at the official documents, at examples of forms, at people on social media who explain how it all works. Don't just sit there and be proud of your ignorance and expect us all to accept your judgment, put in the effort to learn, and be glad that you don't have to learn while dealing with a new or worsening serious health condition like many of us have had to.

Actually no,she's registered blind and has been for decades. She also has severe arthritis and suffers with terrible depression which has been ongoing since my dad died in 1972 but thanks for your concern. My half brother on the other hand is a pure grifter who hasn't worked a day in the last 25 years and is basically given state handouts and family handouts and the use of my mum's motobility car which he runs as family and friends paid taxi. HTH.

I see, I do understand that DLA is/ was different to PIP. Maybe she fulfilled the criteria at the time. I know that the introduction of PIP, was to make it more difficult to claim, at all, or at least that was the Conservatives plan of action. They also started to include mental health conditions as well, I am sure someone will correct me, if I am wrong about that.

You've had some terrible abuse on here and I absolutely identify with your story. There's many posters on here who are in complete denial and they pop up on every thread of this nature. They seem triggered for some reason. I wonder why that is??

I remember reading about two psychologists who did something similar (not benefits related). Their aim was to try to get a patients view of hospital psychiatric care. They found it quite easy to get themselves sectioned and one of them actually found it quite difficult to get out again. I'll try to find the study.

I don’t need to know how the benefit system works, or the ins and outs of it, to know my very fit, active and non disabled grandmother obtained a car via the Motability scheme for the sole use of my cousin, who pays her the equivalent amount that she foregoes for the car every month.

I know this because it’s not a secret. She told me. Not just me. Thought it was a great idea. My cousin, who is a single parent and receives no child support from her son’s father, would not be able to afford a car otherwise. My grandmother doesn’t see it as anything other than helping out a family member in need.

I know that she isn’t disabled because she has never once said she is disabled or referenced any disability. I see her all the time. I take her on holiday with me and my family. We have a great relationship. She’s in her early 80s. If she had a disability that impeded her life, I would know about it. Someone in the family would surely know about it. She takes painkillers for occasional pain in her knees. That’s it.

She obtained DLA way back in the day, for what, I have no idea, nor is it any of my business. I grew up in a very deprived area, and claiming benefits was incredibly common.

I know my grandmother obtained the car and uses it fraudulently because that is exactly what is happening. She obtained the car solely for my cousin. She told everyone as much. I’m not sure why I need to know how the benefit system works to participate in this particular discussion, when my participation is based solely on what I have outlined above.

I sometimes wonder about these people telling all, and sundry about the fraud that they are committing. I wonder if they ever worry about being reported. I suppose that they don't though, according to the amount of posts I read detailing people not caring to be discreet.

Just because a vehicle isn’t adapted doesn’t mean it isn’t a disability related cost.

For example, some families with disabled children need two cars when they would otherwise make do with one. Another example, some families need a bigger car, which therefore costs more, than they otherwise would because of disability related reasons. For example, they may need space for a wheelchair/SN buggy/other mobility equipment/medical equipment or they need 3 full separate seats across the second row because their 3 DC can’t cope with the more bench like seats or the smaller middle seat or they may need a 7 seater because their DC needs to be sat on the third row further away from the driver for safety reasons. Some people need to use a car when others would walk or use public transport. There are other reasons too.

Teen DS1 has a motabilty vehicle. He has a wheelchair he could travel in so we could have a WAV. However, he prefers to travel in a specialist carseat and to use his SN buggy, so we don’t have a WAV. Our current motabilty vehicle has adaptations, including a hoist and a swivel seat that comes out of the car, but previous vehicles didn’t have adaptations. That doesn’t mean the previous cars (and the open insurance policies) weren’t disability related requirements. They were. Without DS’s disability, we would only need a single smaller car. We wouldn’t need two vehicles. We wouldn’t need an extremely large vehicle. We wouldn’t need an open insurance policy.