£25k cap for Motability

And about bloody time as well, it just needs to be means tested as well, along with insurance/police checks for previous accidents and convictions, I am all in favour of the scheme, by brother benefits from it for his disabled child, but there are far too many abusing it. There is no need for a vehicle such as an A4 or an X3, its meant to be a means of transport for those in need, not a cheap way into the premium badge club.

By Shaun34 on 25 October, 2011, 5:37pm

Not unexpected

As a car sales Motability Specialist I have expected this change to happen for a while.

Over the years the range of cars available on the Motability scheme has increased rapidly. Whilst I am all for having lots of choice I agree with the comment from Shaun34 as some of the 'premium' cars coming onto the list have seemed to be unnecessary.

I suspect that a number of people having those cars have been doing so for the 'badge image' and not the practicality.

As to the change of rule regarding nominated drivers, not before time I say. The car is supposed to be for the benefit of the disabled person. If the nominated driver lives miles away how can that work and how do we know the car is even kept at the disabled persons house?

Round of applause to Motability and not before time!

By dastardly01 on 26 October, 2011, 10:29am

About time

I live in Northern Ireland and I have to say the amount of people that recieve this benifit is rediculous. A friend of mine works in the motor industry and the stories I have heard from him are crazy. For example he was once told by a customer that his grandmother was getting "him" a new car because his insurance was too high. Another one actually complained to the upper management that he could not get a performance model (Focus RS) on the scheme.

I believe these changes will benifit the thousands of people that rely on this scheme for their independance at the same time weeding out the lowlifes that give disabled drivers a bad name.

By hsvgtsv8 on 26 October, 2011, 12:45pm

Careful people...

...I think there is something we are all missing here.

As a husband of a motability customer, I am glad the advance payments have also been capped. But I do hope the 25k cap on the cost of a vehicle does NOT effect the specially adapted vehicles some customers need. Have a think...

By dan_gers on 26 October, 2011, 1:16pm

madness

I have to say I find this new proposal 100% madness. Many people seem to have strong opinions without stating the facts. On one hand ANY abuse of this system should have serious consequences but to stop the service that was available due to some "poor media" coverage is unacceptable.

the benfit recieved is clearly a great benefit however I am sure no one in the world would rather be disabled than receive an extra bit of money on a monthly basis.

The bmw, merc and audi's that were available on the scheme were only available if you made an advanced payment of 5k plus, how is this that much different from a normal lease ??? its not.

so its ok for someone to drive in a ford focus supported by the motability scheme however its not ok for an individual to pay an extra 5k and get an equivlant bmw. Thats the individuals choice not anyone elses.

Comes back to the age old debat that just because someone is disabled that they need to fit under a certain image ??

I have to say some of the people getting the benefit who dont deserve it should be taken off it asap and hence it should be assessed on yearly/renewal basis.

By RR1230 on 26 October, 2011, 3:08pm

RR1230 its not about what car you want, its what car you need, its a benefit, not an entitlement, we all probably want an Audi or a BMW etc, but we dont "need" one, hence why in my opening comment, I suggest it should also be means tested, if a disabled person has spare thousands of pounds to spend, well done to them, but that is not what the scheme was intended for, its motability, not premierbility.

By Shaun34 on 26 October, 2011, 5:03pm

Some might say : Not Before Time!

When cars are supplied to the family of the person on Disability Living Allowance, with the only proviso being that they do their shopping once, maybe twice, a month, you realise that the system is being abused. A local used car dealer was at an auction sale of ex-Motability cars, one of which was a petrol Range Rover which, as he said, is a fairly thirsty car. The upper limit of £25k is, surely, plenty to supply a car which does all that is required. Where I stay you can see the top-spec Insignia SRi, CDTi models being driven by people who, while they are entitled to a car, do seem to go for the most expensive, top-spec car available. They may be entitled, but perhaps they should exercise some self restraint.

By n50pap on 26 October, 2011, 5:47pm

Some might also say - these changes hurt the people who really need the scheme

Those people without disabilities should not comment on this scheme without first talking to those who really benefit from it.

As the father of a son who needs a drive from wheelchair vehicle, I have seen both the good & the bad of the scheme.

We have spent a lot of money getting him through a test to the point he can drive and I for one do not want to see his DLA cut just becasue of where he now lives.

By dbridge276 on 27 October, 2011, 8:18am

joby

i think some of these schemes should be stopped , we have friends who are registered disabled and they get a small Nissan every 3 years , but what annoys us is they have a £58000 campervan , they also dont pay council tax , when they cross the Severn bridge tolls its free for them , allthough they are retired they are a lot better of than us , we only recieve a state pension , and all i see wrong with our friends is they are grossly overweight and they limp , so i wouldnt mind having a limp if i could get what they get

By joecroft2 on 27 October, 2011, 10:33am

The whole scheme has got out of hand and should be (must be) completely overhauled. Do people really know that there are over 3000 cars to choose from? That over 300 are completely free? That tyres, servicing, insurance, depreciation and breakdown cover, are all included? That you don't even need a driving license?
There's not a country in the World that can afford to be so profligate with a benefit and it needs to radically change.
Severely diabled people should get a properly adapted vehicle to help them, based on a single suitable model. For the rest, Motability should do a deal with two or three manufacturers for a couple of models each that are tested as fit for purpose.
Motability should continue to help and support those in genuine need. In the present economic climate we will only be able able to sustain Motability if we (the taxpayers funding it) can drive the cost down and remove entitlement to those free-loaders abusing the benefit.

By billmarsh4 on 27 October, 2011, 10:37am

What about the Disability VAT abuse?

Firstly I agree with RR1230 above - why discriminate against achoice of car if the client has the money to pay the deposit, that's there choice.

Secondly there is an area on this theme that I am not sure this directly addresses. And that is when a registered disabled person buys or finances a vehicle they don't pay vat. This has been, I feel, been abused by non other than the motor trade to make double the profit on a new car, especailly scarce luxury models.

I think it's done like this: 1 Supply & register a new BMW with no discount and no VAT to someone who is registered disabled. Dealer makes his usual 14% profit. The registered person is just a go between and will never drive the car. 2. After 3 months the car can be sold, in this case back to the dealer at the list price without the vat. 3. The regsitered person gets a small fee from the dealer. 4. Dealer puts the car up for sale as a delivery mileage, pre reg car for the retail price of a new one and has up to 20% profit to play with.

It's this sort of thing that is wrong and contributes to the massive depreciation on cars. I'm sure you have heard you always lose the vat as soon as you drive out the showroom. This is one reason why - some people pay vat some don't.

Just just bad on the rest of us who do have to pay the vat.

What is the Mobility schemes and alike doing about this?

By terryxp on 27 October, 2011, 11:14am

ossie13

I am on my third motability car an because of my disability need an automatic mpv or crossover as l cannot get into a low car, the price cap would mean that because automatic mpv'sand crossovers are more expensive on the motability scheme l would have to buy a second hand car as all suitable cars on the motability scheme would not come in under the 25k price cap l need a car as l cannot walk with out the help of crutches surely motability could find a different means of stopping fraud .

By ossie13 on 27 October, 2011, 12:47pm

For those who opt not to take it

As a father of a disabled son with a very rare disorder we have the option of taking up the Motability offer in the next few months. I have a quandry , on one hand I think the scheme is great for those (like my son) who require transport to get around and the added bonus of a car that you effectively 'just add fuel' to certainly appeals... however.... I already run a vehicle which I can just about manage to afford to run and feel that it would be unfair to take advantage of the system when there are other more needy people who do not, or cannot afford such a luxury, in a word i would feel like a fraud ... subsequently we will not be taking up the offer at this point in time .
i wonder how many other people have this on their conscience??

By deputydawg on 27 October, 2011, 1:16pm

The problems around mobility really lie around the qualification rules rather than with the cars themselves; all benefits should be means tested. Do wealthy people who can afford to pay £5,000 or so every 3 years for a higher spec car really need financial help with their mobility? At present it's allowed so why not get a more expensive car. The biggest problem for those who have to accept the "free" models is being able to afford the fuel to power it; living on benefit is not comfortable living.

By gramps427 on 27 October, 2011, 1:17pm

For those who opt not to take it

As a father of a disabled son with a very rare disorder we have the option of taking up the Motability offer in the next few months. I have a quandry , on one hand I think the scheme is great for those (like my son) who require transport to get around and the added bonus of a car that you effectively 'just add fuel' to certainly appeals... however.... I already run a vehicle which I can just about manage to afford to run and feel that it would be unfair to take advantage of the system when there are other more needy people who do not, or cannot afford such a luxury, in a word i would feel like a fraud ... subsequently we will not be taking up the offer at this point in time .
i wonder how many other people have this on their conscience??

By deputydawg on 27 October, 2011, 1:19pm

5 mile radius is riduculous.

I have been a named driver on my mother's motability car for 21 years. My mother, herself does not drive. 10 years ago I moved out to an address which is 20 miles away. I also have my own car, but is too small for my mother to get in and also to fit her wheelchair in. When the 5 mile rule comes in my mother will have to give up her motability car because there is nobody available to drive it for her. This will then make her totally house bound. Don't motability realise that with house prices such as they are, who can afford to buy a house within 5 miles of their parents these days. This rule is totally ridiculous.

By pieman62 on 27 October, 2011, 7:22pm

Deputydawg, I applaud your selflessness, it would be nice if more people had your attitude to benefits systems (not just Motability but in general). Ossie13, there are plenty of automatic MPV's under 25k.

By jwavdigital on 27 October, 2011, 7:23pm

Could I use the allowance & buy a bigger car

See my previous comment.
Well that is an option, but unfortunately I would be unable to afford to insure or run a bigger car.

By pieman62 on 27 October, 2011, 7:34pm

I'm sorry pieman62 but you're talking rubbish; a larger car needn't cost anymore to run or insure than a small one or your mother could just pay for taxis. House bound? I think not. How do you think people with wheelchair bound elderly relatives cope when they are not entitled to DLA? As for 'terryxp' and the no VAT scam- I'll be sure to pass your comments on to my partner and friends who lost jobs at car dealers during the recession.

By Filthy on 28 October, 2011, 12:16am

selfhelper

I am appalled to hear that so many people abuse this scheme, which should be means tested, as should every benefit. I am entitled to motability, but can afford my own cars, so dont use it.
My friend, on the other hand, is a Company Director with a three car garage, yet claims disability for arthritic hands, recieves a blue badge, a weekly sum, and even has had his boiler changed free of charge - all because he is 'entitled' to it.
Lets get back to giving disability benefits only to those who a) need to fund a disability in some way and b) cant afford to pay for it themselves.

By paulrouse1 on 28 October, 2011, 2:32pm

choice

one thing about the new list is theres around 1100 manual cars and 308 automatics. I think the list should exclude manuals, as a disabled driver I can drive a manual I passed my test in one. I do prefer the ease an automatic brings and I am sure most disabled drivers would. For people who drive the car for a disabled person am sure it wouldn't be a great issue for them to drive manuals. The best thing is the bhp limit on under 25's I think this should be applied to all drivers.
I also think all drivers should be matched to each car, I mean as in what driver needs 7 seats. The car is only for the help the disabled driver not anyone else they may want to ferry about.
Not to pick on ossie13 but they are 41 cars on motability which are high up and easy to get into. I also need a high up car so i know that list well
The motability scheme isn't just the car its the servicing, tyres, insurance and RAC. I do feel if your a high earner 50k plus and you receive DLA higher rate which you would be entitled to, you shouldn't be able to use that for a motability car.

By geord on 29 October, 2011, 8:13pm

Only in Britain

Lots of comments on this subject...

My thought is - why should the hard working tax paying public even pay for this scheme? Posters above mention that by denying the right to add a payment and increase car choice, they are identified as disabled! There is also talk about it being means tested? Why? Its the tax payers that fund the scheme. Many of the "claimants" have made little contribution to the running of the country yet they take, take, take, in benefits at every opportunity.
Ive worked hard all my life and never claimed a penny from the government. However, if the day comes that I qualify for mobility, Id better bloody get it as Ive been funding it for the past 25 years!
The mobility scheme should consist of a choice of around 10 cars, such as a Ka, Fiesta, Focus, Mondeo, CMax, Galaxy, Kuga, etc. An assessment should be conducted to decide which class of car a claimant is entitled to. If claimants dont want these as they are labelled as "disabled" then fine- do without. Im damn sure Id rather drive around in a Fiesta than use buses.
This country is on its knees and the current amounts paid out in benefits is preventing any sort of recovery.
I know of several people on mobility, one who came into the country from South Africa - his massive fat wife who has not paid a penny to the government was gifted a mobility car after one year of being in the country. Its a damn disgrace.

By kugaman1 on 29 October, 2011, 8:19pm

Nasty bunch

I am very dissapointed in some of the comments from Auto Express readers on here.
The knee jerk reaction of "serves the cripples right" is quite frankly appauling and also shows a complete lack of understanding how the scheme wroks! It does NOT effect the taxpayer how much over £2,000 is paid or under, as the cost is exactly the same for each model and specification! the Disabled person picks up the tab for the on cost, a cost which unlike normal lease schemes is not paid bacjk in equity at the end of the therm. If someone like me, who has worked for over 37 years, paid tax into the country for all that time wants to spend some of my hard earned savings to have a slightly better spec car, why is this wrong, when I will say again, it costs the taxpayer nothing!

By akeister on 31 October, 2011, 7:06pm

One car fits all?

I have read through plenty forums regarding the changes to motability, and generally the consensus seems to be, that the amount of fraud taking place, through the payment of benefits to "disabled" people is overwhelming, therefore increasing the amount of fraud on the motabiliy scheme. Surely this should be nipped in the bud, surely somebody has actually registered these people as disabled?

I am a carer for my wife for the last 12 years, as she has been wheelchair bound for the last 17 years. The fact that Geord mentioned in the above comment that you think "all drivers should be matched to each car, I mean as in what driver needs 7 seats. The car is only for the help the disabled driver not anyone else they may want to ferry about."

The fact that my wife is disabled does not entitle her to a seven seater?
We have a family of 4 children, and where my Mrs is disabled, she is foremost a mother who has to "ferry" around passangers also.

The fact the the whole of the U.K, is "on its knees" is not down to payment of benefits, I think a look a little closer to the top of the ladder might be in order, but thats for a different discussion. I gave up a quite highly paid job in the building industry to looks after my wife at the age of 25, not allowing a hell of a lot of time for me to "contribute " to the coffers, but yes I did contribute. but I'm sure anybody in my Mrs position or any other disabled person would give up what benefits are given, for the sake of going out an earning a few honest quid.

By mduckod on 28 November, 2011, 3:13am

One car fits all?

I have read through plenty forums regarding the changes to motability, and generally the consensus seems to be, that the amount of fraud taking place, through the payment of benefits to "disabled" people is overwhelming, therefore increasing the amount of fraud on the motabiliy scheme. Surely this should be nipped in the bud, surely somebody has actually registered these people as disabled?

I am a carer for my wife for the last 12 years, as she has been wheelchair bound for the last 17 years. The fact that Geord mentioned in the above comment that you think "all drivers should be matched to each car, I mean as in what driver needs 7 seats. The car is only for the help the disabled driver not anyone else they may want to ferry about."

The fact that my wife is disabled does not entitle her to a seven seater?
We have a family of 4 children, and where my Mrs is disabled, she is foremost a mother who has to "ferry" around passangers also.

The fact the the whole of the U.K, is "on its knees" is not down to payment of benefits, I think a look a little closer to the top of the ladder might be in order, but thats for a different discussion. I gave up a quite highly paid job in the building industry to looks after my wife at the age of 25, not allowing a hell of a lot of time for me to "contribute " to the coffers, but yes I did contribute. but I'm sure anybody in my Mrs position or any other disabled person would give up what benefits are given, for the sake of going out an earning a few honest quid.

By mduckod on 28 November, 2011, 3:19am

I think the cap on cars is fair enough. If you can afford a downpayment of 10 grand on a car you really dont need a subsidised vehicle! But I am glad there is still choice. You ask what disabled person needs a 7 seater, well lots do. Disabled people often have families, and families should still be able to do things as a family depite one of them being disabled. We are in the process of getting our first motability car, a 7 seater. We have four children and if we didnt have a 7 seater car we would not be able to go anywhere together. We can hardly send one of the kids on the bus or train alone when we go out together! My husband is disabled and cant drive, so I have to drive, if he needs to go to appointments, or out anywhere else, who has the kids? Cars are not a one size fits all thing, so there needs to be choice, but those choices should be limited to sensible ones. There seems to be a few misconceptions about this scheme though. The cars are only really tax payer funded in the sense that dla covers the cost and comes from the taxpayer. Irrepsective of whether someone uses the money for a car, the DLA is paid anyway. Surely tax payers would rather the money was being spent on getting a disabled person mobile again rather than on something less essential? If motability was scrapped tomorrow, it wouldnt affect the amount of money a person gets in DLA.
And one final comment, lots of people who benefit from this scheme have been tax payers themselves. My husband paid higher rate tax for years before he became disabled. I am pretty sure he shouldnt feel guilty for benefitting from it now, after paying in so much for so long.

By steph123 on 20 December, 2011, 8:05pm

Disability Car Abuse

Reading the comments left,it just goes to show what country we live in today.I agree that anybody with a disability should be able to enjoy life as much as possible and as someone who has two disabled family members and I.m not talking about badly behaved children, I no how difficult life can some times be.
But it doesn't mean that cars should be allocated to people who abuse the system.From personal experience I have seen cars ordered which are not suitable for purpose.My Grandfather years ago got a Mini Metro 1.0L basic and he was so pleased with it in his final months,no 18 inch alloys no parking sensors air conditioning just a car to get him out enjoying his life.If you can't get a nice car for £25,000 then somethings wrong.But its about vanity in most cases and I'm sure if some disabled people if they could would be just happy to be taken out in there car that is supposed to be for there use.But sadly they are sat in the house while others get the benefit of a brand new car to go to work in or take out on a night out with there friends and before you think I'm talking about my family I'm not.My nephew just passed his test at 17 but is unable to buy a car because he can't afford the insurance Quoted £2400 on a car worth £1400 yet his 17yr old friend who lives with a disabled person can drive a £25000 car under the disability scheme at no extra cost for going to the PUB sorry picking up something for the disabled person.Something wrong there.Genuine disabled people deserve any help they can get but its not always the case

By n16njs on 26 March, 2012, 12:33pm