Mobility Car Rules - is this genuine?

cyclonebri1

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Unless you negotiate an exemption (and this is very unlikely!) with Motability and the DVLA, you cannot use the car to commute to/from your workplace. The car is for the use of the child, not to drive the parent to/from work.

Read all the post and you will realise that is hwat is being argued about/discussed.

From me with love.

PolishBigSpender

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Read all the post and you will realise that is hwat is being argued about/discussed.

From me with love.

It's been argued elsewhere.

The critical test is the 'road tax'. This is for a disabled person's use only - and it is pretty clear cut that you cannot use this taxation class for needs other than for the disabled person.

It would also be very unlikely that Motability's insurers (RSA, last time I checked) would pay out on a claim if the person was going to/from a place of work in a car meant for a disabled person. In fact, if you made a claim against the insurance without informing them of this fact - you may very well be commiting insurance fraud.

zaksmum

My sister has a motability car for her very severely mentally handicapped 16yr old son. She does not drive, but her husband uses the car to commute to and from work.

He recently had an insurance claim following an accident in the car, which was not his fault. He was worried about claiming in case questions were asked as to why the 16yr old was not in the car.The (no win no fee) solicitor said that whenever he handled similar claims in the past, he advised the driver to say he was using the car to check out a toy or item of clothing for the disabled person, or to collect a prescription for him. The solicitor added that even going to work could be seen as being for the benefit of the child or disabled person.

Nobody ever did check and the claim was paid without any hassle.

My sister struggles as a result of the strain of caring for her 16yr old, and might not otherwise be able to afford a car which is used evenings and weekends solely to give this very disabled boy some semblance of a life outside the home.

Nobody ever did check this out and my sister's husband's claim was paid without any problem.

Edinburghlass_2

tobyc wrote: »

i am getting worried here, i have just been awarded high rate dla for both mobility and care. I am a single parent and have been working full time until december when my 14 year old son was diagnosed with a sudden severe neurological disease. Apart from the devastation, i have reduced my hours at work to 2 half days so that i can still be there for my son but have the release from the madness in my brain. Yesterday i had to scrap my car as it had given up the ghost and i intend to use part of the dla to get a mobility car. Does this mean that i cannot drop my son to school, go to work and then return home and pick him up. There is no public transport nearby to my work and if the school need me to get him early i wont be able to get there. Some people may say that i shouldnt work and maybe further down the line i wont be able to but for now it is keeping me sane. This is a grey area and i think i will need to discuss this with the people at the motability.

They are the people to discuss it with and not strangers on the internet who don't even have a car through Mobility.

PolishBigSpender

zaksmum wrote: »

My sister has a motability car for her very severely mentally handicapped 16yr old son. She does not drive, but her husband uses the car to commute to and from work.

Which is completely against the terms and conditions of the disabled taxation class applied to the car.

He recently had an insurance claim following an accident in the car, which was not his fault. He was worried about claiming in case questions were asked as to why the 16yr old was not in the car.The (no win no fee) solicitor said that whenever he handled similar claims in the past, he advised the driver to say he was using the car to check out a toy or item of clothing for the disabled person, or to collect a prescription for him. The solicitor added that even going to work could be seen as being for the benefit of the child or disabled person.

That's the joy of using cheap solicitors - and if anything, this solicitor is advocating an illegal act. To make a false declaration to an insurance company is a very, very serious offence - if your sister's husband was investigated for this, then driving a car that wasn't insured, without road tax and with an extra charge of fraud/deception on top.

I'd be interested to know what the solicitor was basing his opinion on - as the DVLA rules surrounding the disability taxation class are very clear.

From direct.gov.uk -

To claim exemption from vehicle tax, the vehicle must be registered in your name or registered in the name of someone you nominate to drive for you (a nominee).The vehicle must only be used for your purposes, for example shopping or getting prescriptions.
If it is being used by the nominee or someone else for their own personal needs, then
the exemption will be lost and the normal rate of vehicle tax must be paid.

Nobody ever did check and the claim was paid without any hassle.

And if somebody did check? Your sister's husband could have lost everything - it would seem unlikely that Motability would allow them to continue to keep the car if the deception was uncovered, and a driving ban would almost certainly follow, plus a fine and possibly a custodial sentence.

Is it worth it?

My sister struggles as a result of the strain of caring for her 16yr old, and might not otherwise be able to afford a car which is used evenings and weekends solely to give this very disabled boy some semblance of a life outside the home.

The car isn't for 'evenings and weekends'. It's for the child's use 24/7. It seems rather wrong that the disabled child has no access to his car during the day.

Nobody ever did check this out and my sister's husband's claim was paid without any problem.

And if somebody does check it out, I suspect they may be in a lot of trouble.

SomeBozo

zaksmum wrote: »

My sister has a motability car for her very severely mentally handicapped 16yr old son. She does not drive, but her husband uses the car to commute to and from work.

He recently had an insurance claim following an accident in the car, which was not his fault. He was worried about claiming in case questions were asked as to why the 16yr old was not in the car.The (no win no fee) solicitor said that whenever he handled similar claims in the past, he advised the driver to say he was using the car to check out a toy or item of clothing for the disabled person, or to collect a prescription for him. The solicitor added that even going to work could be seen as being for the benefit of the child or disabled person.

Nobody ever did check and the claim was paid without any hassle.

My sister struggles as a result of the strain of caring for her 16yr old, and might not otherwise be able to afford a car which is used evenings and weekends solely to give this very disabled boy some semblance of a life outside the home.

Nobody ever did check this out and my sister's husband's claim was paid without any problem.

This is just fraud, I've sent the link!

Bozo

colin13

ive said this b 4, but is going to work and making money not helping the disabled person IMO it is

cyclonebri1

colin13 wrote: »

ive said this b 4, but is going to work and making money not helping the disabled person IMO it is

Yes, but this an internet forum, and you are arguing with the technically correct faction amongst others.

Reason does not prevail here.

But then again anyone reading from the start will surely realise just how unclear, or, open to interpretation, this situation really is

calleyw

colin13 wrote: »

ive said this b 4, but is going to work and making money not helping the disabled person IMO it is

Do explain how is taking a persons benefits away from them, so you can have nice new car to drive to and from in work help the disabled person.

I don't see how leaving a disabled person alone for hours on end and taking away nearly £50 a week DLA benefits them at all. And if you have the car how does the disabled person get out and about if they have two named drivers?

And if you are working most people would be running a car anyway so find it moot point. I run a car S reg and it still goes and does everything I need. It is the only car in the household. So I don't feel the need to take my husbands benefits away from him to have a new car.

I know the answer that mobility give even when I have pointed to them to the DVLA web pages that clearly state about disabled road tax. They said it is ok to use to go to and from work.

I don't believe on the DVLA website that it says anything about there being a exception for mobility uses for the use of a disabled tax disc. But if you can find it then please do post the link.

I personally would still have doubts about it even if the mobility cars where not supplied with disabled car tax.

I think mobility needs an overhaul so that people who needed adaptions or are on a low income could get cars. I also know that it would be a pain the backside running two cars one for the disabled person and one for yourself. So do understand it is difficult if there is only the mobility car. And don't know the answer to get around this.

I am sure that I read somewhere on MSE that somone had an accident in mobility car while going to and from work and they where told they where not covered to do this. So rather than checking with mobility you need to check with the DVLA because of the disabled tax disc and Mobility's insurance company.

If people feel happy with what they are doing then carrying on but personally it is does not feel right to me. As the old saying goes each to there own.

Yours


Calley

PolishBigSpender

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

But then again anyone reading from the start will surely realise just how unclear, or, open to interpretation, this situation really is

The problem is that the situation is not open to interpretation. The disabled taxation class, as stated on the direct.gov.uk website amongst others, says this.

If it is being used by the nominee or someone else for their own personal needs, then the exemption will be lost and the normal rate of vehicle tax must be paid.

This isn't open to interpretation at all.

It is clear that by using the car to drive to/from a place of work that isn't the disabled person's workplace, then the exemption does not apply and consequently the car is being driven without appropriate payment of the tax.

Unless someone can provide proof from Motability that there is an exemption for a family member to use the car to/from a workplace,

calleyw wrote:

Do explain how is taking a persons benefits away from them, so you can have nice new car to drive to and from in work help the disabled person.

It's a discussion for elsewhere, but this unfortunately seems to be one of the major abuses of the Motability scheme.

I also believe that Motability cars are supplied free of VAT - and there may be restrictions on this benefit.

I've also found this from Motability.

http://www.motabilityonline.co.uk/site/document_library/Its_Easy.pdf

Page 8 is of interest.

The car must be used for the benefit of the disabled customer

Essentially, the argument can be summed up as thus. Motability do not provide a definition of what 'benefit of the disabled customer' means, but the DVLA provide a clear definition. Therefore, as all Contract Hire vehicles are supplied with the disabled taxation class, the car cannot be used for personal needs.

Using it to commute to/from a place of work unconnected with the disabled person would thus fall foul of the rules.