To think this is a fair change to the Motability scheme...

[BusyBumbling]

BBC News - 'Premium' cars like BMW and Mercedes cut from Motability scheme
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9znkxq47xo

It's still supporting disabled people with the cost of owning a car whilst also supporting the British car industry. I think public opinion has been listened to on both sides and this seems very sensible.
It may also reduce some of the costs of the grants paid from the scheme which were helping fund the upfront cost for premium cars for poorer claimants.

That’s what I don’t understand either, as someone with Multiple Sclerosis (physical and neurological symptoms) who receives standard rare, I have a feeling people are saying it makes them anxious to plan a journey, go on public transport etc (anecdotal evidence) as the physical mobility criteria is very high. I suppose I could say that too but I just wasn’t brought up that way.

The cost of the VED and VAT foregone, surely at least?

So somewhere between £2k and £9k per car.

VED has an Expensive Car Supplement, so toward the top end of that range for the cars under discussion.

Or do you mean that if these cars aren’t on the scheme that no one would buy them privately? (Therefore no tax actually forgone vs the counterfactual)

Of course disabled people can have a nice car.

The question isn’t that - but a) should the government be funding lease agreements on expensive cars and b) who should be receiving that.

The government doesn’t fund the lease on expensive cars.

The government lays a PIP or DLA amount monthly to either the disabled person or towards motability for the car. That payment remains the same regardless of the make model adaptions driver etc of the car.

YABU the payments won't change. My friend is a hospital consultant who needs an adapted car due to being paralysed from the waist down, why shouldn't he be able to have the car he wants and is best suited to his needs if he can afford it?

You don't understand how the scheme works. People don't get grants to allow them to have just any car they fancy. If a grant is awarded, its awarded for the lowest priced car which meets the person's assessed needs. They need to prove their specific needs to the grants team. The grants team will then list a couple of options, thus removing much of a choice at all. More recently it's becoming almost impossible to get a grant for any car which is not fully electric which discriminates against those who cannot have a home charger, who may live very rurally with little to no access to local public chargers, and those where the person's disability means they could not manage the stopping/waiting required to charge when out and about/en route to further away appointments etc.

Not everyone disabled is entitled to PIP (the majority are not). Not everyone entitled to PIP claims it. Why would you put yourself through that humiliation if you didn’t have to do so? And not everyone who does receive PIP gets the same amount of money. Some is for care needs, some is for mobility needs, and there are different rates for each depending how significantly the disability restricts the person from basic tasks like washing, eating, dressing, or walking.

Only those who are entitled to PIP AND claim it AND have a disability that impacts their mobility AND that disability impacts their mobility so severely they receive the highest rate of mobility payment are eligible to use the mobility part of their PIP (PLUS £X amount of their own savings/ earnings depending which car they choose and how expensive it is, i.e. they pay the additional cost of a more expensive car themselves and it doesn’t impact the taxpayer at all) to lease a car through Motability.

It is, therefore, obviously quite ludicrous to try to compare the total number of people in the population who have some kind of disability (defined in law as a long-term health condition persisting for over 12 months which impacts their daily life) with those eligible to pay to lease a car through Motability, who are a tiny proportion of the people who have some kind of disability: those who have the most severe mobility issues and can only walk very short distances (or not at all) or live in chronic pain.

Their use of the scheme or which car they choose to lease if they do so makes no difference whatsoever to the amount paid as disability benefits. If they do not choose to lease a car or mobility scooter they will receive the same amount in cash instead of using it to pay a Motability lease, so that they can instead lease or buy a car or scooter privately or pay for taxis, etc.

There have been some problems with criteria allowing people with significant mental illness such that they are a danger to themselves or others if walking/ using public transport to access the scheme, which some people reportedly have been abusing.

The answer to that is more stringent evidence being required to claim for mental health conditions, not restricting the choices of disabled people to choose to use their money to lease a car that best suits their needs or that they simply happen to prefer, given it has zero impact on anybody else. Why shouldn’t they? They are the ones funding it with money which is theirs to spend as they see fit.

What if they can't drive? Can they use the money to buy a car for a family member, who then presumably can drive them around?

Yeh exactly. We’re not living in lavish times in this country, and yet those that are ‘too anxious’ to get a bus get money for taxis and cars. It’s a farce! It has to stop.

its calculated into the advance payment unless it can be sourced via another funding option

the car is not bought, its leased.

This seems fair and reasonable.

They are not paying enough tax to pay for what they get out of the welfare state, never mind supporting disabled people. It’s just green eyed jealousy and it’s pathetic, when they wouldn’t want the disability that goes with it!

@Ralphiethedog i suspect that there aren’t too many people who qualify for PIP in that way.. might be some but I can’t imagine it’s many. I mean you can’t just “say” that and not prove it…

The people I know that are too anxious to get a bus would be pretty much stuck at home if they did not have PIP to pay for taxis. They would not be able to attend the support groups set up to support them for starters.

75% of pip claims for the under 25 are for mental health conditions. This is the issue the country is facing. No one wants people in a wheelchair with MS to have their car taken away, but so many people are taking the piss we have no money left.

So they find another way of getting there or don’t go at all. They need to use some initiative rather than constantly getting the begging bowl out! The state cannot afford to provide an alternative.

@MarbleHunt

and it doesn’t impact the taxpayer at all) to lease a car through Motability.

which car they choose to lease if they do so makes no difference whatsoever to the amount paid as disability benefits.

These two statements are not the same, because there is a subsidy baked into the scheme in the VED and VAT treatment.

That subsidy/tax break is more for more expensive cars.

This debate reminds me of the state pension one, in that there is a subsidy that’s not always obvious to the user.

It makes for terrible public policy debate because instead of debating what cost is appropriate, we get stuck into “I’ve paid for it” “No you haven’t” pantomime.

You can’t just say “I’m too anxious” and then get benefits!

The bar is set very high. I have a just turned 16 year old who we are about to transition to PIP. We have to send a lot of evidence to show the extent of his disabilities including his very well documented anxiety and inability to communicate with anyone who isn’t a “safe” person. Even with all of that it’s not a given he will get PIP.

@sirzy and even more difficult to show that he needs enhanced rate I expect! It’s not as straightforward as some one have the public believe

If they didn't go, they would have no interaction with other people at all. They are using their PIP money as it was intended.
But I guess you are one of those people that think the disabled should be stuck at home. Out of sight and out of mind, eh? And if they are not leaving the house, they can't possibly need PIP.

Fair enough, obviously some people do though, I’ve seen it myself. Referring more to adults, who will be abusing the system to get a car (yes it is free, in my book if you don’t work for it, it’s free) There’s no physical or medical test for ‘anxiety’ though, is there.

There is no medical test for lots of things.

It’s one area that infuriates me (and I support the scheme) that it’s seemingly harder to get the mobility part for physical disability than learning/ mental health in some cases.

and I say that as someone with first hand experience because my ds has both hereditary spastic paraplegia and autism!

Such as? Multiple sclerosis? Cerebral Palsy? Parkinson’s? MND?