I sort of can see the point as a sort of "passing a kindness on". So maybe when you're just starting out and need a car but can't afford it and someone helps pay. Then when you're earning more you then pay back towards someone who is starting out and needs a car...
I think in that way it is quite nice.
However, I'm afraid I haven't personally seen many that I don't think of as either grabby, legalised begging or "well that's not necessary, save up the money yourself"!
Medical ones particularly rile me. I have some knowledge of certain conditions. Of those I have known either the person or the condition I can count on the elbows of both arms the number that I wouldn't put in the scam to obtaining money by deception.
As a general rule if they say no provided by NHS in the condition I know best, most of the time they mean either "The NHS doesn't provide them because they won't help" or along the lines of "this is an easy way of getting money and I'll "discover" quietly the NHS does pay when I've got the money in".
I've seen the BBC webpage promoting some of these, often with lies that would be disproved if they spoke to anyone with a small knowledge.
I think there is a case for bringing in regulations. At time I feel it gets uncomfortably close to beggars using disabled children in the Victorian age to increase their takings.
Firstly it encourages those (usually American) doctors doing "trials" than never come to anything and don't work.
Secondly, I think it is easy to pull at the heartstrings with a sob story, and that's fine. But a lot of the time how do we know it's true. I could set one up with a photo of one of my dc at a relevant age saying they need money for X condition. Yes, it will be harder to bring in newspapers etc support if it's not true, but I'll bet it happens, and if they bring in a few thousands, then do it again with a different story. How many of those are followed up and money returned.
Thirdly, it can sometimes be what the parents/person wants not necessarily what's best for them. I can remember being at a meeting and a parent was fuming about what he could get on the NHS for his child's disability. Some people were shocked at the meanness of the NHS-he'd brought along the adaption to show everyone how rubbish it was. However the reason why he could bring it along was not because it was rubbish, but because his dc not only didn't need an adaption, but actively didn't want it-nor do almost all people in their position. He wanted it because he thought it would be better for them. They (and others with the condition) would disagree.
A leading surgeon said at a meeting I was at that parents often want what he offers out of guilt. They want to make it as near "right" as possible. he has to tease out before deciding whether to go ahead whether the child (if old enough) actually wants it, and whether it will be helpful for the child in the long run. If the answer to either is "no" then he has to consider whether to continue. In the case of the former he will make sure that the child is refusing from a point of understanding, and the latter it very rarely is ethical to go ahead.