To think this is disability discrimination?

[TripleSeptic]

My friend was telling me today, she's ordered a Motability car, but car dealership said cars are in short supply and they can't honour her order because they have to save the cars they have for people who will buy on finance, because there's more profit in the deal. She said they had to get approval from the director of the company and he has declined to authorise the sale by the salesman. My friend was supposed to be collecting her car next week, ordered today, and got a phone call shortly after she left to say that the director said "no". The salesman knew nothing about having to ask for authorisation, because apparently no one wants to commit that to writing, it's a new, unwritten rules. He is furious about it and probably told my friend too much. I don't know what I would have told her if it's true, but I don't know if he has a different axe to grind, or if he's happy to leave, because knowing the dealership he works for, they'll not like their saleman telling this story, true or not. I sell cars and I am aghast. There is a shortage of some cars due to a shortage of components, but I wouldn't have thought it would be legal to pick your customers based on the profit in the deal. Shouldn't it be first come, first served? I would love to mystery shop them and find out their position, but I think I should support my friend and try to source her a car, and be practical for her. She's really hurt but is trying to sort something else. AIBU to think that this is disability discrimination?

@user11838686969686

I love it when people who've never even looked at the Equality Act declare that indirect discrimination is not discrimination just because they don't understand what they're even discussing.

Or because they'd be comfortable discriminating in that way themselves.

Yes this!

If a policy disproportionately negatively affects disabled people then it is probably discriminatory.

It doesn't have to affect all disabled people and it doesn't have to affect only disabled people for it to be discrimination.
Businesses are not allowed to discriminate in order to make more profit.

@DentonsFringeArnottsWaistcoat

I wanted to see if anyone detached from the situation thought it was discrimination. At best, its a difficult business decision, at worst I don't know I was al ready to say of course it is discrimination as only disabled people use Motability, but now I’ve thought about it I’m not so sure. If the car was for sale and they were saying we’re selling it to anybody except you, that’s discriminatory - it’s either for sale or it isn’t. But that’s not what Motability is, is it? Motability is leasing not buying (I think that’s right?). So I doubt it could be seen to be discriminatory to say this car is for sale but not for lease (as long as they weren’t offering any other type of leasing for that car). But, either way, the bottom line is if they want to be part of the Motability scheme they should honour it when a client wants to lease a vehicle.

It is a lease, and they'll lease it via a different company, because some leasing companies pay more, so it's like you saying "I'm financing via a Tesco personal loan" and them saying, "no, you need to use our finance company that pays us commission, or else we won't sell you the car". Thanks for that insight, I think she is being discriminated against, but not disability discrimination. Thanks for the insight!!

Omg, I've never seen a more fitting username! Thank you 💓

@Voice0fReason 💓

Oh well, in that case, if there are different lease options for that particular car, but just not the one used by disabled people, then that’s clearly discriminatory, not even a grey area.

@TripleSeptic I just wanted to say that my husband has just got his first motability car and one garage was totally useless and you could tell they just didn't want to deal with him. He tried a different garage with the same type of car but a bit further away from us and they have been fantastic, took 2 weeks to get the car and even then it should have been sooner but the motability system went down so it delayed it. I would tell your friend to forget about the crap garage and try somewhere else.

@Moondust001

Is not discrimination. Its business. They didn't refuse the sale because she's disabled. They refused to deal with Motability (who are actually the client, not her) because they can make more money selling directly rather than to a group company. She can buy the car directly and pay the price.

They’ve either already agreed to supply vehicles via motability scheme or they haven’t. OP’s friend hasn’t wandered in on spec, for her to have placed the order in the first place, it’s a make, model & trim available through motability. Those things are agreed at national level.

The thing is, OP, that the monthly lease prices are typically only £20-40 lower on motability compared to commercial lease, and that’s due to the size of the motability “fleet” allowing for bulk discounts. It’s not a subsidy. So it’s hard to believe that the profit for the dealership is much different.

I wouldn't have thought it would be legal to pick your customers based on the profit in the deal

Of course it's legal. It's the first law of selling.

YES, it is disability discrimination. They can't refuse someone service because of disability. If this was taken to court the car dealership would lose.
Firstly your friend needs to complain to motability and then if She qualifies for legal aid get them to help make a discrimination claim. Would be less hassle.
This would be indirect discrimination based on disability.
Name and shame the car dealership. There is also a motability forum which she can post on. The guys on there are pretty clued up.
forum.whichmobilitycar.co.uk/forums/forum/mobility-car-main-forum/

DentonsFringeArnottsWaistcoat

I wanted to see if anyone detached from the situation thought it was discrimination. At best, its a difficult business decision, at worst I don't know
I was al ready to say of course it is discrimination as only disabled people use Motability, but now I’ve thought about it I’m not so sure. If the car was for sale and they were saying we’re selling it to anybody except you, that’s discriminatory - it’s either for sale or it isn’t. But that’s not what Motability is, is it? Motability is leasing not buying (I think that’s right?). So I doubt it could be seen to be discriminatory to say this car is for sale but not for lease (as long as they weren’t offering any other type of leasing for that car). But, either way, the bottom line is if they want to be part of the Motability scheme they should honour it when a client wants to lease a vehicle.

Motability buy the car from the dealership then lease it to the customer.
The dealership need to be very careful. For a lot of them, more than half their sales are through Motability. There are very strict rules to follow though and if they are caught doing this they could lose their contract.
Contact Motability and tell them what's happened.