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.

It IS subsidised because of the VAT exemptions and governmental grants/incentives.

Nothing has been 'given out' - people use part or all of their mobility payment to lease a car from a provider. It does not belong to them, and the luxury models have huge fees attached - we're talking thousands.

My dad had a major stroke and has hemiplegic paralysis and this scheme has been an absolute godsend for him. He has saved to get the higher end vehicles because he experiences so much bodily discomfort that the distance of the vehicle from the ground and the way the seat feels make a huge difference to how far he can drive due to pain - only having use of one arm and leg means that the layout of the car dictates whether he can drive it, he certainly can't drive any given car.

It costs the taxpayer no more or less if he leases from Ford or BMW - the difference is paid by him.

There is so much hatred and envy (although not of the disability, mind) at the idea that somebody else should be able to have their life 'levelled up' to go some way to mitigating disabilities that most people don't even think about, much less having to cope with.

It's not even just with Motability. You might run a very successful business and be able to afford to buy yourself a very flash, expensive car outright with your own money. However, you have a disability which means that you need a blue badge to enable you to park somewhere accessible for you. See the hatred and sneers from so many people who see you or see your car with the BB on display and spit angrily about how dare disabled people feel entitled to a nice car, and often go off on imagined furious rants about "my taxes paying for their Porsche" etc.

'If you require a car because you are disabled there should be basic cars available'

But you are also missing the point. Cars aren't just for one person, they are usually used to transport an entire family. And they weren't getting free luxury cars. What is the point of a tiny/useless car that can only transport 1 person if the disabled person is in a family of 6. Shouldn't they be able to top up the car to get one that is useful for the entire family to use? Disabled people aren't always in a solitary bubble.

Motability ISNT subsidised by the government, it uses pip payments but it is an entirely separate entity (comprising of a charity and a limited company)

If motability wasn't cheaper, people could use their pip payments and lease a car outside of motability. Various subsidies mean that someone can pay much less for a car through motability than doing so independently.

All this.

Disability benefits are to help will some of the additional costs disabled people face. It's not compulsory for disabled people to be poor! Many do very well in their careers and can afford a decent vehicle. What they need/get help with is the adaptations. The cost to the state is the same, regardless of which car they have.

This move is nothing to do with cost though, it's to do with encouraging the use of British built cars and none of the luxury brands are built here. The headline is horrible and deliberately misleading.

It is by some people. They don’t want to see or hear of anyone getting what they perceive as ‘more’ than them, including disabled people. Being disabled isn’t a choice and I’m sure the majority of them would chose to not have their disability

But why?

Why should people with disabilities have to accept basic?

Everyone else who wants a luxury car isn't demonised because they pay a premium to have one.

Are you going to go after wheelchairs next? My mum got a basic one free, but we paid a premium to get a lighter, less ugly one.

It's no different when it comes down to it.

So basically you see disabled people as “less than”. You work full time but can’t afford to run a car so how dare disabled people have something nice. Disabled people who might also be doctors or lawyers or engineers can’t have, what you consider to be, a luxury car because you can’t afford to run a car?

You see disabled people as less deserving simply because of their disability.

Totally agree!
The cheek of them!

I suggest we follow Soviet Russia example and put them on these instead

People's choice of car will also relate to their disability. They might need one with a high driving position. They might benefit from one with an automatically opening boot, or with sliding doors. For someone else, being low to the ground might feel better.
Limiting disabled people to a choice of a few cars will affect all that.

Of course disabled people shouldn’t be forced to drive a cheap car regardless of wealth. If someone has the wealth to buy/lease a luxury car, they can still do that outside of the scheme.

Perhaps rather than removing the option for luxury cars, they should introduce means testing to access the motability scheme.

The purpose of the motability scheme is to ensure that disabled people have access to independent and reliable mobility. It’s to recognise the barriers that disabled people face. If someone has amassed wealth which would enable them to buy a luxury car, they don’t need a tax payer subsidised scheme to ensure their mobility.

I’m not a benefits basher. I truly support benefits being given to people that have a need for them.

I also think it's good that a disabled person is able to drive a new car, with less chance of breaking down on the roadside which I hate doing myself, but would be so much harder if I had a disability.

Yea. Fucking disabled people with their better standard of life. Arseholes.

What I find confusing is that someone who can afford the significant down payment needed for a high end car needs government funding.

Generally speaking means testing costs a lot to administer doesn't it - could cost more than it saves.

If a person can afford a higher payment, then the question is why the tax payer should contribute at all. At that stage it is not a necessity which needs to be supported by the tax payer.

You would be amazed how many people dislike seeing (insert very unPC name for the less able) in the community.

I can guarantee none of the people having a "special moment" over news like this (new underwear please) has spent more than a few second as a carer.

As many people have said before - if people want to be disabled, they should plan to do it without expecting handouts. We've all got lives to lead.

Makes no difference to me. I get PIP ERM but can never pass a driving test due to my disability. I'd rather keep the money and continue using public transport (for free, with my disability Freedom Pass). So virtually no money spent on transport costs and extra cash in my pocket.

I don't understand the point, if you look at the figures you'd pay an extra £140 a month leasing a bmw ix1 outwith the motability scheme.
You'd pay an extra £169 to lease a citroen c3, which I think we can all agree is a fairly standard and reasonably priced car.
Why do you think the less fancy cars would save the tax payer money? Are you very gullible and taken in by social media outrage concerning other matters?

The scheme effectively costs the taxpayer through relief on VAT, insurance premium tax and VED. The more expensive the car, the bigger those tax breaks are.

Because we have decided as a country to support people who don't start on a level playing field.

It’s vile isn’t it, I completely agree.

God, people’s absolute stupidity.

The amount of subsidy is capped. People can choose to use their own money to top up the amount.

I really worry about the people allowed to vote and be on juries given the level of wilful misunderstanding.