Osborne looks to slash benefits bill

OptionARMAGEDDON

SingleSue wrote: »

I think for something like a BMW, they would have to pay a pretty stonky advance payment to make up the difference to a bog standard car.

But, never having had the cause to look properly, I could be wrong on that!

Edit just had a look, for a 1 series 3 door, you need to pay an advance payment of from £1549. The amounts are ever increasing right up to an X3 from £9499. The final advance figure needed to be paid could well work out more than this.

So to get the posher cars, you need to put your own money in to make up the difference.

1500 quid is buttons for a (free) top marque car!

Graham_Devon

OptionARMAGEDDON wrote: »

1500 quid is buttons for a (free) top marque car!

It's not free.

You exhange your benefits for the car. Some people choose not to have the car, but to have an extra £45 (approx) a week.

It's also £1500 which you will never get back, and thats for the base version.

You can do the very same as those with the rights to a mobilty care. It's called personal contract hire.

OptionARMAGEDDON

So, lets get this straight, you lose just under 200 a month, and for 1500, you get a car with a list of 19,000? With a loan of 17,500 over 3 years at 5%, you would pay £520 for the car. No wonder people are happy to swap their benefit for an asset that would otherwise cost twice the amount over 3 years.

Emy1501

OptionARMAGEDDON wrote: »

So, lets get this straight, you lose just under 200 a month, and for 1500, you get a car with a list of 19,000? With a loan of 17,500 over 3 years at 5%, you would pay £520 for the car. No wonder people are happy to swap their benefit for an asset that would otherwise cost twice the amount over 3 years.

The vehicle is being leased not bought. The amount lost is about 230 a month plus the amount put down would be roughy another 40. I don't think the scheme pays Vat and i doubt they are paying list price for the vehicle. Therefore I doubt the scheme is actually costing any more money than the DLA payments as it's run as a non profit scheme and charity.

Therefore the impression I get is whilst the scheme is better for the disabled person there is little or no extra cost to the government. Also from next year you will not be able to get any car that costs more than 25k under the scheme

RenovationMan

I've given up with this OptionARM bloke, he totally ignores every point other people make that undermines his stance and just keeps repeating the same mantra. I'm sorry if I am wrong but I think he's just a troll trying to get a rise out of people.

RenovationMan

ILW wrote: »

Fair enough, the sublety went right over my head.

Sorry, I was perhaps beeing a little too clever. The basic point I was trying to make is that like many of the issues we discuss/rant about on here, when you scratch the surface you start to see the flaws in the argument.

It's fine to have these discussions, I certainly have learned a lot about motobility than I knew before and while I didn't have the same level of doubts (indeed hostility) that optionarm has, I did have a some preconceptions about the scheme.

I found out in my research that motobility is a registered charity and uses the money raised to run the scheme and also to help adapt the cars to people's disabilities. If anyone is interested in raising money for motobility, here is a link to their website: http://www.motability.co.uk/main.cfm?type=SGFR&ObjectId=2771. The scheme receives some money from the government, like a lot of charities, but it is not run by the government. If it was then I dare say it would cost a lot more to administer.

As far as the scheme is concerned, "The Motability Scheme enables disabled people to exchange either their Higher Rate Mobility Component of Disability Living Allowance or their War Pensioners' Mobility Supplement to obtain a new car, powered wheelchair or scooter." The higher rate amounts to £51 per week.

This £51 is used to lease a vehicle over 3 years. If the person in receipt of the HRM Component wants a nicer car then they have to pay the difference. For example, if a car was £100pm, then the person would have to pay £49x12 months x3 years = £1764 advanced payment for the car. The government charges no VAT on the car hire.

I also dare say that the car dealers do a deal on the hire of their cars because it is good PR and a steady income stream.

The rhetoric about BMW's and the like for free is completely without foundation. Everyone gets a basic level of benefit and they have to top it up if they want a better car.

ILW

To sum it up, it appears that the scheme is just where a person uses their mobility allowance to rent a car, which seems fair enough. Whether all the people getting the allowance are deserving, is another discussion.

Graham_Devon

ILW wrote: »

To sum it up, it appears that the scheme is just where a person uses their mobility allowance to rent a car, which seems fair enough. Whether all the people getting the allowance are deserving, is another discussion.

Basically that's exactly what it is.

Family member is on the scheme. You can't just buy any car. You are shown the cars you can have in the brochure. Then it's up to the individual dealer as to whethr you can have it, however, it's normally the case that you can.

It's never yours, and you have to hand it back after 3 years. Any deposit you paid is gone.

Insurance and tax are paid for, as with leasing, however, if you want anything extra you pay for it, for example foreign insurance.

Theres also a mileage allowance, can't remember if it's 12, 15 or 20,000 now, as the mileage is factored into the resale price.

Some dealers practically fall over themselves to try and get the business of part ex on a motability scheme.

Theres bad points though. You have to wear tyres to within a mm of their life to get them changed. No one seems interested in any problems you have, only interested in servicing the car. Problems, from my experience are a right pain in the rear. Service they will bend over backwards for you.

It's just a lease basically. You can pay as much or little as you want. The point is, the customer is giving up benefits, and often shelling outcash for this "free car" so many like to describe it as.

It's the insane disability parking system which gets my goat. And not just mine, many of those who use it. Parking for free for leisure purposes....while making anyone else pay handsomly? Just don't get it. My father is so embarrased by it he actually pays instead in many cases.