Cars on motability scheme are now limited up to AP £2000

wazza

Unless i am mistaken it is bad news to some motability customer who like to have a 'posh' car or any car that commands at least £2k AP.

There has been a change announced in the selection criteria for cars. The cars available will be below an AP of £2,000. The limit will not apply to WAV.

http://www.motabilitycarscheme.co.uk/main.cfm?type=CNI&ObjectId=2835

Richie-from-the-Boro

wazza wrote: »

Unless i am mistaken it is bad news to some motability customer who like to have a 'posh' car or any car that commands at least £2k AP.

There has been a change announced in the selection criteria for cars. The cars available will be below an AP of £2,000. The limit will not apply to WAV.

http://www.motabilitycarscheme.co.uk/main.cfm?type=CNI&ObjectId=2835

I see nothing wrong with that :

- plastic~pigs went out in '77, so they've been around for 33 years
- there are over a half million Motability MOTA's on the road
- the SVF has been around for 20 years to pay for bigger / adapted MOTA's
- most of the MOTA's they supply are 8 grand less than the UK average

All they've done [ with disabled peoples money ] is clamp down on those who want a premium MOTA costing 25 grand or more from Dec this year ;

- those with needs above 25 grand will still get their MOTA
- only accept nominated drivers who live within 5 miles of the customer
- a Statement of Responsibilities must be signed at the beginning of each lease by the customer
- no drivers under the age of 21 on the Scheme from January, unless they reside with the disabled customer
- and restrict drivers under 25 to cars in Group 16 or lower which also have a power output of 115 BHP or less

It all seems perfectly reasonable to me, I mean there's so much in the pot and always more need than money to supply that need. It seems to me that insurance costs for [ nominated ] people under 25 / cutting down on fiddlers / and reducing how the car may be used [ abuse detection has to be paid for out of the pot ]and by whom is perfectly sound as a policy from a disabled persons point of view.

Many people in this group have MOTS's of £30k or more and need them - they will still be taken care of FOC in the scheme :

- some nice people [STRIKE]braggards[/STRIKE] in this group have MOTA costing in excess of £35k happily tell me its for no other reason than they can
- I cautioned people in this group over a year ago this was on the cards for 2012, much as I also did last year for the Blue Badges issue

Many people have needs, the less that's wasted on avarice or fiddlers the more there is for the genuine needy .. .. and in times of rising costs I for one am pleased with the clampdowns on misuse - more for the needy, no one in this rich island we live in should want the disabled to return to the plastic~pig days.



nit - nite

pwales_2

great now my next car will have to be a vw t4 wav because the cheaper options for wheelchair users has been removed.
my advance payment was 2700 now wavs will be 10x that !

bullied by the government and rolled over instantly without thinking about wheel chair users who dont want to drive a van costing 3x the amount

wav vw t4 40k
vw sharan 28k


aprox depending on adaptions


edit these people should be weeded out at dla stage not motability stage !

rogerblack

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Many people have needs, the less that's wasted on avarice or fiddlers the more there is for the genuine needy .. .. and in times of rising costs I for one am pleased with the clampdowns on misuse - more for the needy

Then you'd argue in general for the means testing of DLA?

moose1982

The bit about named drivers being no more than 5 miles away from the customers home address could ruin me a bit, my girlfriend is my named driver yet she lives 6.8 miles away according to Google Maps directions. She is a named driver so that if I'm unable to continue driving for whatever reason, she can take over because if I go any real distance, she is with me anyway, so it's good to have that backup.

Richie-from-the-Boro

rogerblack wrote: »

Then you'd argue in general for the means testing of DLA?

Means testing DLA is a moral argument, not an economic argument so of course not, those with need rather than a lifestyle choice are taken care of.

Those who want a biggie and have ten grand spare should be paying the whole thirty grand and not drawing their DLA or choosing to get a Motability vehicle - now there is a better moral debate.

In the last financial year Motability's own figures were :

- 7,144 allegations relating to fraud or abuse of the scheme
- including cases of uninsured driving, unauthorised use, drink-driving and criminal activity
- many of which led to prosecution by the Police
- enforcement action was taken by Motability in 2,139 cases
- including 829 customers terminated and their cars withdrawn
- an additional 486 applicants were suspended or permanently excluded from the scheme

100% of all of those could not have happened without the complicity of the disabled person. If like the Blue Badge debacle we don't keep our own house in order, sure as god made little apples someone will bring a great clonking boot down as is the case here.

[Deleted User]

rogerblack wrote: »

Then you'd argue in general for the means testing of DLA?

i`d agree with 2 things

means testing dla and taxing dla,this would instantly make the 20% savings the govt are aiming for and remove the need for reassessing every claimant from 2013

Richie-from-the-Boro

rogerblack,

I could have put this comment in #6. I've chosen however to make it a separate # number for your personal attention. 3 things were looming in 2010 - 2011 that / would / could / should / be of severe concern to the disabled in 2013 :

- Motability Reform
- Blue Badge Reform
- Housing Reform

Housing Reforms are going to significantly impact on the old and disabled in general, and specific groups of the disabled and old in particular. I've lumped together old & disabled deliberately !!! they form the largest group by % and legislative instruments acting on old will have an unintended corresponding affect on the disabled.

The Blue Badge and Motability Reforms came about largely because the disabled, a group usually invisible to the rest of the nation, attracted attention to themselves and became vulnerable to press scrutiny.

However .. .. Housing reforms intended for next year have the potential to create havoc for the disabled, in this case the damaging outcomes of intended legislation will not have been caused by the disabled and are not fair - not even handed - and not moral.


""" When you affect a situation, you have an effect on it. """

corgiman

I would go further and Limit the cars to £15000 and less than £500 AD and yes I do have a mobility car the cars are meant to help us with mobility not as a prestige symbol

pwales_2

corgiman wrote: »

I would go further and Limit the cars to £15000 and less than £500 AD and yes I do have a mobility car the cars are meant to help us with mobility not as a prestige symbol

I take it you are one of many on the scheme who can walk then? Coz if you are in a chair and the driver what car for 15 grand will work

savemoney

Its easy to have a limit but some people may have large families so having a limited may restrict there ability to go out as a family if the disabled person especially has difficulty get in/out. Not all disabled persons are drivers. I think some common sense and a little leeway for those who fit that criteria

No I am not disabled but my daughter is she is in crutches. I dont have mobility car although I could have one for her. I just think one size doesn't fit all people have different circumstances

I noticed the other day after DM reports about this that you cant get that BMW now and allowance s just under 2k

corgiman wrote: »

I would go further and Limit the cars to £15000 and less than £500 AD and yes I do have a mobility car the cars are meant to help us with mobility not as a prestige symbol