Luxury cars removed from the motability scheme

[AutumnLeavesandKnittedJumpers]

https://news.sky.com/story/luxury-cars-removed-from-motability-scheme-ahead-of-budget-13475029

too little too late. As a full time worker I can’t afford to run a car, let alone a luxury car. Motability should be a standard car - available in automatic and manual, an option for wheelchair users, and that’s it.

https://monkdebunks.substack.com/p/no-the-government-isnt-handing-out

I don’t need any adaptions. I have kidney, bladder and complex autoimmune issues that mean I struggle with walking and have uncontrollable incontinence issues which limit my mobility (and this is part of the reason I qualify for a blue badge). Not everyone who has a mobility car needs adaptions.

If that's the case, then the fuss ought to be about the qualifying criteria for higher rate PIP, and not what an individual in receipt of it choses to do surely? At that point, whether the £77 is spent on a Citroen, a BMW, a Mercedes or a Land Rover is irrelevant to the Government and the taxpayer.

I am bemused by how Motability became the target of so much hatred by those on the left and in this Government. The Government says it wants to reform welfare, but to date has just ballooned an imagined £1b billon black hole into an actual £70billion one.

Motability is not that complex a set-up. It works because of guaranteed (as in no credit risk) income from the Government, the VAT exemption for the disabled and economies of scale - it buys and maintains a huge fleet.

To reduce the number of Motability cars you simply need to review the qualifying criteria for higher rate PIP and review the VAT exemption. Limit higher rate PIP to those with physical disabilities, and limit the VAT exemption to modified vehicles, and the numbers would look very different.

Personally I would still let Motability receive payment direct from the Government, because some of those in receipt of it would struggle to pass a credit check for leasing. I would also let Motability lease cars to those in receipt of higher rate PIP but that did not need a modified vehicle. But if all non modified vehicles were removed from the VAT exemption their cost would go up on the scheme anyway, making the 'luxury' cars less attractive.

My solution would protect the benefit to those who need a modified vehicle, make leasing a car accessible to those in receipt of PIP but who don't work or who can't otherwise get credit, increase VAT income to HMRC and it would reduce the cost of higher rate PIP to DWP.

It's what I think is called a joined up approach. One might almost say a policy... Alternatively, you can whip up a frenzy about Jeff with his leased Mercedes EQA that his neighbour's aunt's cat told you is used by his grandson to deliver pizza, but not actually save any money and worse, negatively impacting those in genuine need.

I'm sorry that you can't afford to run a car. IMO you should be able to. I have no idea how I'm going to afford to replace my elderly car when it eventually goes.

Whether or not able bodied people can afford a car or not is a straw man argument when the subject is, whether people with disabilities should be able to have a more expensive car if they can afford to pay a top up.

If you're going to get moralistic about people who have disabilities should all have the exact same level of car no matter what their personal circumstances, by that logic all able bodied people should also all drive the same level of car, regardless of if they can afford a nicer one.

I would have been in favour of this however I would say that unless you’re eligible you don’t know the needs of the individual who is leasing the car.
I have an autoimmune condition that affects my wrists. I can’t drive a basic manual vehicle as I get shooting pain up my wrists and I just struggle to put the car into gears. Similarly a manual vehicle would be very uncomfortable on my knees when changing gears. I have a “luxury” 10 year old car as I don’t get PIP but it’s extremely easy to drive even compared to auto vehicles. I can’t begrudge those who get the mobility element of PIP to have whatever car suits them best. Not all basic cars may also be adapted (even if it’s not luxury) so what should they do, use a basic car that is unsuitable? The adaptations could also cost more than the potentially luxury car?

There is so much wastage in other sectors of the government and services that could be focused on rather than a small group of individuals who most probably don’t have a luxury PIP vehicle anyway?

@OneBookTooMany
I had depression after my first daughter died. Didn’t use Motability then or receive any benefits of any kind.
I could still drive. If I’d asked for a car from Motability I’d have been rejected because I didn’t have PIP at the higher rate.
Why didn’t I have PIP? Because despite having depression I could plan a journey or walk or dress myself etc.
Fo you see why “getting a car for having depression” might be a simplification?

I had PTSD (or have I suppose) after I was assaulted by a NHS staff member. Didn’t get a car then or any welfare benefits either.

I did get a WAV when my severely disabled daughter was 4 because it was demonstrable that she cannot walk or stand and can only travel in a suitable vehicle so I am eligible to hold the lease from Motability (and liable for its safe return next year and for the cost of the adaptations and for the cost of the downpayment).

She will still have full DLA (higher rate) so costing exactly the same to the public purse as she does currently even though she won’t have a Motability car - unless the scheme continues and I can afford another £4,000 upwards for another non refundable deposit (and then elect to lease from Motability).

I don’t know if that clarifies why everything is not as simple as some reported statistics appear to be - lots of people with depression go to work with or without PIP and while depression may be one condition a Motability leaseholder has, it’s not the straight line it appears to be from depression to leasing a Motability car.

"Motability should be a standard car - available in automatic and manual, an option for wheelchair users, and that’s it."

How about those who need hand controls, as they can't use their legs so foot pedals are no use? How about the fact that most lower end cars don't have sufficient back support, or it isn't adjustable, if you have spinal issues? Then we have the various types of wheelchair users - those who can drive themselves and need to have their wheelchair stored in a place they can reach it from the driving seat vs those who are driven about and need specialised chairs or are driven whilst in their chair.

So you welcome a two tier society where the able are more important and should progress to a higher standard than the disabled. You sound a lovely person.

Absolutely not. Just because you can't drive doesn't mean you don't need a car to get you to where you need to be. You might need someone else to drive it for you.

Just because someone throws in their own money doesn’t magically turn the taxpayer-funded part into the “great value” some are saying. All it really shows is that people will happily pay extra for something nicer. Not exactly rocket science!

Which part of 'the UK is on its knees' is going over the heads of those moaning about the supposed injustice of not being able to snag a Mercedes when a shiny brand new Citroën will do the job? Plenty of working people are on the brink of going under, and they certainly don’t have the luxury of casually adding a few extra thousand for a shinier badge. Yes, the middle and upper earners will take more of the load, that’s how progressive systems work, but everyone who can share a bit of the load should. If that means you don’t get the Merc, I’m honestly fine with that.

And this argument about self-funded top-ups being proof the scheme is excellent value? It’s the equivalent of claiming a subsidised meal is brilliant for the government because the customer bought themselves a dessert. Lovely for them, but has no bearing the subsidy.

In the current climate, which is what we should be considering, many of the able are operating at lower standards. So there is already a two tier system.

So. Joan is able bodied. She works full time and takes the bus to work, which costs her £6 a day. Clare does exactly the same job but has no use of her legs due to a disability. Clare can't take the bus. If she wants to get to the office she has to drive and pay parking costs, costing her £20 a day, or a taxi costing £30 a day. So, for doing the exact same job, Clare is between £280 and £480 a month worse off than Joan.
Non means tested disability benefits are not designed to replace earnings and provide subsistence. They're designed to reduce the disadvantage disabled people face because of their disability when compared with non disabled people.
Personally I think that's entirely valid and that there are other ways we should be considering to raise money before we seek to change that.

Indeed not and I suspect you know, that your circumstances are not the circumstances that some people are questioning regarding this scheme.

I suppose that those who have depression and anxiety or drug related issues -disabilities that were quoted on the thread by a PP- also don't need adaptions to their Motability cars and one might question why they need a Motability Scheme car at all.

That said, I imagine that riding around in an unadapted Mercedes, which you would not be able to buy if relying wholly on personal funds with no government input at all, might make you feel a bit brighter.

So there is that!

Indeed.

There are relatively few vehicles that can accommodate the adaptations needed for various disabilities. The higher the disabled person's needs, (including but not exclusively people who are too disabled to drive even with adaptations), often the higher the level of adaptation needed for the vehicle and the choice of vehicles that can take that adaptation are fewer. For anybody who is interested, I recommend having a google for used adapted vehicles for sale. There are some extremely ingenious adaptations for e.g. people who only have use of their left or their right hand, or who can only enter and exit a vehicle from a particular side, for example. It really is incredible what can be done to facilitate somebody being able to drive.

Yes, people pay extra for the nicer car, we all know that.
But what about the massive VAT savings they’ve been pocketing? 😉
Thank God it’s finally being investigated.
Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for all the benefit twisting, and the money can finally reach those who actually need it.

No I'm not fine at all with it but I am very fond of my MIL, who is now over 90 and I'm not prepared for this to ever come back on her as these people are a friend, and a neighbour of hers.

Anyone finding this "entertaining " is the one with the questionable mindset.

@DuncinToffee

Its a great scheme, and a pretty good deal. c. £288 for 60,000 miles, fully comp insurance for 3 drivers, maintenance and tyre cover.

At the end of the day, Motability is a lease scheme that allows higher PIP recipients to trade the £288 pm for a car, and get a better one if they pay an up front amount.

The main objections are:

1. The conditions that qualify for HR PIP. That isn't the scheme's fault.
2. The VAT exemption - this is good as it allows a good deal, but my qualm is where that VAT break crosses the fairness line when it comes to luxury upgrades.

We should not lose site of how much a car with full maintained, 60,000 miles would cost in the open market, and how unattainable that is for many people. You may not agree, but there are many people out there who work their butts off and I don't think we should slur them as as ableist for questioning what may look like to them, a bit unfair and not the best place for a tax break.

The only suitable vehicle for a friend who has to use a powerchair is a mercedes van, he has to pay a substantial advanced and all the adaptations. Fords, VWs etc no longer fit the bill as vans are becoming shorter, in height, not length. He has no choice if he wants to go more than around 500m from his home. If he has a hospital appointment without his WAV he would need an ambulance each way, he goes once a month. How much do you think that costs?

Being able to leave your home isn’t something ‘nicer’ its vital.

OP - which "basic" British made cars do you suggest those eligible for Motability purchase?

Rolls Royce? Bentley? Or maybe a cheaper option such as a small Lotus? Great boot for wheelchairs and other mobility aids.....

Are you honestly jealous of, for example, a young person who lost their mother and brother in a car accident and now can't move from the chest down and received an insurance payout? Should they and their full time carer squeeze into a Mini Cooper and tow the electric powered wheelchair behind or should they use the money to have a truly accessible vehicle for their situation even though it may be German made and considered a luxury brand by some small-minded people?

It will be interesting to see what impact it has on the used car market. The mobility scheme actually supports the used car market. The irony is that as the luxury brands hold their value better they are actually better value for money than some of the basic cars.

Disabled people are still people at the end of the day and why shouldn't they be able to choose what car they drive.

And no I don't have a mobility car, u donate a 16 year old ex mobility car that I bought when it was 3 years old.

You are dividing this into a binary where you believe anyone without PIP is able bodied

That's so far from the truth it's ridiculous.

Huge numbers of people living with disabilities don't get any benefits and really struggle. Why should their taxes be spent on luxury brand cars?

Some sounds put out jealous because someone else has disablities and needs a car to get about and they are paying a higher premium to drive one.
Oh, hang on a moment, I personally, would rather have a basic car that goes and have all my limbs / good all round health and not rely on other people for my mobilty or care needs. So wtf are YOU moaning about OP ???

What lower standards, exactly?

My husband has a significant physical disability, he didn’t receive PIP when we lived in the UK as it was such a farce when he did try to claim it. He is very happy that his tax money was enabling people who need a WAV to lead full lives.

People totally (and willfully!) misunderstand the scheme.

My ds is 21. He’s a wheelchair user.

He had the most basic model of small SUV available and paid £399 for the deposit. He also had to pay for all the adaptions (hand controls) made to the car too.

Unlike his friends who can buy cheap second hand run around a he needed a car that fit the wheelchair, could be adapted and he’ll have to keep paying the deposits and adaption costs every time his lease is up.

Due to the type of car he needs and being unable to buy a cheap run around the insurance would price him out as well.

The subsidising allows disabled people to get out and about on a level playing field.

Older people who earn more are able to pay more deposit and therefore lease a better model.

most people can only just afford the most basic car.

Those who need a wheelchair adapted vehicle (WAV) which is usually a can need to pay £7000 deposit. That’s not a luxury car it’s literally the only way they can get out and about.

Instead dog being jealous of people who are physically disabled they and empathise what life might be like on a daily basis for them and be pleased they have an option to lease a car.

Remember that for many that car allows them to go out to work and contribute to our taxes and public services. It isn’t always take just because a scheme exists. It exists to be supportive to even up the playing field.