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

Richie-from-the-Boro

savemoney wrote: »

Is there evidence that clamping down on fiddlers will result in more for those genuine. I very much doubt it, its more to do with saving money

- clamping down on fiddlers is an excellent idea and should have been better enforced years ago
- clamping down on fiddlers should be done regardless of who the beneficiaries are

Look either the genuine Motability users clean up their act or someone will do it for them .. .. usually in a much more draconian way. Taxpayers [ including the disabled ] / newspapers / politicians et al will all find it easier to kick in a half open door

To answer your particular assertion - do you know what kind of ideas the ' nasty party ' already had formulated if Motability had not implemented changes in an effort to ' tighten up ' the rules on misue.

corgiman

pwales wrote: »

I'm not saying that .I am returning a flippant view without considering other people like the other poster , a 15 grand small car suits him but would not work for me that's my point, the cheapest car for my needs cost 28 grand a/p of 2750

But the car has kept me mobile which is what the mobility scheme provides cars for

pwales_2

corgiman wrote: »

But the car has kept me mobile which is what the mobility scheme provides cars for

But what about keeping me mobile? I cannot afford over20 grand advance payment for a wav , I most properly would get a grant towards a wav but why not let me have a Saharan which I would pay the ap myself? The wav I am referring to is drive from wheelchair type

savemoney

I have no problem clamping down on fiddlers but some genuine people dont like jumping through all the hoops. As I said I dont think this is about giving more money to genuine its about saving money

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- clamping down on fiddlers is an excellent idea and should have been better enforced years ago
- clamping down on fiddlers should be done regardless of who the beneficiaries are

Look either the genuine Motability users clean up their act or someone will do it for them .. .. usually in a much more draconian way. Taxpayers [ including the disabled ] / newspapers / politicians et al will all find it easier to kick in a half open door

To answer your particular assertion - do you know what kind of ideas the ' nasty party ' already had formulated if Motability had not implemented changes in an effort to ' tighten up ' the rules on misue.

savemoney

Fair enough its just that post came across like that

I dont think most people do need top end cars etc but that said I wouldn't want a onse size fits all there most be exceptions as everyone is different and need different needs one of which shouldn't be luxury

pwales wrote: »

I'm not saying that .I am returning a flippant view without considering other people like the other poster , a 15 grand small car suits him but would not work for me that's my point, the cheapest car for my needs cost 28 grand a/p of 2750

pwales_2

savemoney wrote: »

Fair enough its just that post came across like that

I dont think most people do need top end cars etc but that said I wouldn't want a onse size fits all there most be exceptions as everyone is different and need different needs one of which shouldn't be luxury

You are right the sharan I have is big to fit my chair in but it is a base model but does have a gsg gearbox for hand controls which raises the cost 3 grand compared to a manual model, don't get me wrong it's a real nice car but not luxurious like am x 5 but almost as expensive

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

I am cheesed off.

I have a Ford Galaxy Titanium on Motability that I paid an AP for. I have been in Motability for donkeys years and have always added an AP to get something a bit better - why should this be removed when the AP is my own money?

If I choose to top up from my own cash I can't see why there is a fuss.

And people who say people dont need top end cars why dont motor manufacturer's make one basic model of car then? Why is there choice? Why don't we scrap first class on trains and planes as people don't need that either. Nor do they need designer clothes, quality electrical goods and quality foods.

Living in a democracy is about choice else we'd all be driving state dictated Trabants including those not on Motability.

corgiman

pwales wrote: »

You are right the sharan I have is big to fit my chair in but it is a base model but does have a gsg gearbox for hand controls which raises the cost 3 grand compared to a manual model, don't get me wrong it's a real nice car but not luxurious like am x 5 but almost as expensive

Whilst I totally sympathize with your disability I still say the car changes have not gone far enough the changes are needed as I read somewhere there are 11000 luxury cars out on lease and why should the taxpayer be paying for £30000-£35000 cars there are 1476 available cars at the moment people can lease and there are plenty of cars available under £15000 on the market that can keep people mobile which is what the scheme provides cars for.

The scheme does provide WAV if needed

split_second

motability is a brilliant scheme, my mum would be lost without it, she needed a car with no clutch and it allowed her to have one, my father in law to be has one too, and it helps him loads as well. to be fair if you need a wav and they are willing to pay then get it, thats what the scheme is for

pwales_2

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

I am cheesed off.

I have a Ford Galaxy Titanium on Motability that I paid an AP for. I have been in Motability for donkeys years and have always added an AP to get something a bit better - why should this be removed when the AP is my own money?

If I choose to top up from my own cash I can't see why there is a fuss.

It's because a right wing disabled hating propagander led blame passing government minister leaned on lord motability and lord was his face rolled over to keep his job , well that's my view