[quote Animood]@mrsm43s
You REALLY don't see an issue with someone taking a disabled persons form of transportation (a) without her knowledge and (b) against her explicit consent?
Really?
If you think that's ok then I genuinely don't know what to say. [/quote]
Firstly, I am disabled myself. (Not enough for a BB, and I don't need an automatic, but I wouldn't have the ability to walk to the nearest bus stop/train station or even the local corner shop without assistance).
I don't understand why OP is witholding her consent for her OP to use the more economical car for local journeys when she's not planning on using it anyway.
I don't understand why anyone would feel "stranded" just because they don't have a car sitting outside, when they are not intending on going out anywhere anyway.
I certainly don't understand why anyone would have an issue with their DP getting their car MOT worthy for them.
I think this is a whole lot of drama and being portrayed as something very different to the reality, which is simply OP's DP using the most sensible (economical) car when he believes (rightly, it appears) that OP isn't going to need it. It would be a very different situation if OP had plans, and found that her DP had gone out in her car and had actually left her stranded. But there's no suggestion that he is ever taking the car when she is likely to need it. She only knows he's taken in when she notices its not parked outside, or she sees him drive back in it.
I'm working from home today, and my DH has just gone out in the shared car. Despite not having the ability to go out, I'm not "stranded", I'm just at home! I have no need for the car today, so it doesn't bother me that it's not sitting parked outside.
As I said in a previous post, it would make sense for both cars to be automatic for better flexibility. But if OP has no need for a car at any given time, then I don't see why her DP wouldn't take the most economical car for the job.