Fraudulant use of Motability car?

Richie-from-the-Boro

pstuart wrote: »

I believe that the £2000 support ( plus a % pro rata payment from the AP) that longer term claimants would receive can be taken off the price quoted if they want to buy their current car.

Thanks for that. The most we can do is provide facts. Take care P Stuart.

Edit : I should have been more explicit in my #80 post - pro-rata in my case was the doctrine of 'cash-in-bank transitional support allowance'. The total amount of support is the same, but for those who choose not to avail themselves of the car 'buy out' option the cash contribution to staying mobile is a worthwhile help.

Transitional support allowance

(1) If you first became a Scheme customer by 31 December 2012 and return the car to the dealership in good condition and within 21 days of the DLA payments stopping, you will be eligible for a one-off £2,000 transitional support package.

(2) If you first became a Scheme customer from 1 January 2013, or you rejoined the Scheme during this period following at least a one year break, and car is returned on time in good nick within 21 days of the DLA payments stopping, you will still be eligible for a one-off £1,000 transitional support package. This reduced amount is because information on the Government’s plans for PIP has been publicly available since this point.

(3) If you become a customer during 2014, or you rejoined the Scheme during this period following at least a one year break, you will not be eligible for transitional support or payments. However, if you return the car to the dealership in good condition and within 21 days of the DLA payments stopping, you will be eligible for the standard £250 which is line with our general policy for ending your contract early.

sdfdsfsadas

My word, a lot to catch up on here. Several points in order -

1. Like Sarah said earlier in this thread, and as I believe I've already mentioned, this issue was causing me to lose sleep. Like her, I also checked with Motability, who were typically helpful and cheery and said it was fine for me to use the car to basically do anything as long as I'm not putting in hot laps around Silverstone (those days are sadly long behind us!).

I also checked with a friend of a friend who is a retired police sergeant with years of experience in traffic policing, who said (with a wink and a nudge) that all the police really care about from the tax perspective is that the car is either taxed, or tax exempt in this case. It's basically too much trouble for them to try and push for doing you for abusing the system as it's way too hard to prove it. Unless you're committing other offences, its easier just to let you go.

2. Despite the above, we've decided, much to my partner's annoyance, that we're going to just lease a car instead of using a Motability car. My partner's disability means we need nothing more specialist than an auto gearbox, so this is easily doable without having to rely on Motability. Worth pointing out to all those getting on their political high-horse, that this makes no difference to taxpayers (of which I am one) - my partner still gets the same rate of allowance. We're just spending it on the same thing - a car, most likely the exact same make and model. I imagine some people spend it on fags and booze, but I digress.

3. On the political points - I seem to share some similar views to Richie, albeit not quite as vocally. I must say that as a working class disabled couple with a very low income, I certainly do NOT share the views of those who want to berate and blame the "Bloody Tories" for their treatment of disabled people. The way some idiots carry on, along with media sensationalism, you'd think they were throwing disabled people out on the streets to starve. Not the case at all. My partner isn't even severely disabled, and his PIP isn't getting cut. I'm disabled, but can still get about and support myself. Maybe I'd have been entitled to benefits a few years ago, but in my view, the fact I'm not is a good thing. Why should I get benefits? I can live my own life and don't need or want tax-payers to support me.

Given both me and my partner are rapidly (rather too rapidly) approaching retirement age, I'd rather benefits were cut for those who don't need them, in order to sort out our pensions crisis given our aging population, and our horrendous national debt. This is all getting a bit too political for me, but it's certainly food for thought.

Lanzarote1938

sdfdsfsadas wrote: »

2. Despite the above, we've decided, much to my partner's annoyance, that we're going to just lease a car instead of using a Motability car. My partner's disability means we need nothing more specialist than an auto gearbox, so this is easily doable without having to rely on Motability. Worth pointing out to all those getting on their political high-horse, that this makes no difference to taxpayers (of which I am one) - my partner still gets the same rate of allowance. We're just spending it on the same thing - a car, most likely the exact same make and model. I imagine some people spend it on fags and booze, but I digress.

3. On the political points - I seem to share some similar views to Richie, albeit not quite as vocally. I must say that as a working class disabled couple with a very low income, I certainly do NOT share the views of those who want to berate and blame the "Bloody Tories" for their treatment of disabled people. The way some idiots carry on, along with media sensationalism, you'd think they were throwing disabled people out on the streets to starve. Not the case at all. My partner isn't even severely disabled, and his PIP isn't getting cut. I'm disabled, but can still get about and support myself. Maybe I'd have been entitled to benefits a few years ago, but in my view, the fact I'm not is a good thing. Why should I get benefits? I can live my own life and don't need or want tax-payers to support me.

Given both me and my partner are rapidly (rather too rapidly) approaching retirement age, I'd rather benefits were cut for those who don't need them, in order to sort out our pensions crisis given our aging population, and our horrendous national debt. This is all getting a bit too political for me, but it's certainly food for thought.

What a refreshing post from someone who 'walks the walk'. Good luck to you both in the future.

fed_up_and_stressed

sdfdsfsadas wrote: »

My word, a lot to catch up on here. Several points in order -

1. Like Sarah said earlier in this thread, and as I believe I've already mentioned, this issue was causing me to lose sleep. Like her, I also checked with Motability, who were typically helpful and cheery and said it was fine for me to use the car to basically do anything as long as I'm not putting in hot laps around Silverstone (those days are sadly long behind us!).

I also checked with a friend of a friend who is a retired police sergeant with years of experience in traffic policing, who said (with a wink and a nudge) that all the police really care about from the tax perspective is that the car is either taxed, or tax exempt in this case. It's basically too much trouble for them to try and push for doing you for abusing the system as it's way too hard to prove it. Unless you're committing other offences, its easier just to let you go.

2. Despite the above, we've decided, much to my partner's annoyance, that we're going to just lease a car instead of using a Motability car. My partner's disability means we need nothing more specialist than an auto gearbox, so this is easily doable without having to rely on Motability. Worth pointing out to all those getting on their political high-horse, that this makes no difference to taxpayers (of which I am one) - my partner still gets the same rate of allowance. We're just spending it on the same thing - a car, most likely the exact same make and model. I imagine some people spend it on fags and booze, but I digress.

My partner isn't even severely disabled, and his PIP isn't getting cut. Why should I get benefits? I can live my own life and don't need or want tax-payers to support me.

If you don't want tax payers money then cancel your partners DLA claim ...or never get in the car which you are buying with tax payers money (his dla) ... simples....

Alter_ego

Can your spouse drive? If yes could they drive you to work?
Sorry if this has been asked I haven't read all the replies.

FBaby

Or is it to enable the disabled person to have as 'normal' a life as possible, including a 'normal' family life with kids who can have swimming lessons?

Why are you assuming that all 'normal' families are able to take their kids to swimming lessons?

Not every family can afford these, let alone take them to their lessons, this is why schools offer swimming lessons as part of the curriculum.

Not every parent drive and many will take their kids where they have to go using public transport, or not at all if public transport is not reliable.

This is what gets to me, this assumption that 'normal' families have it all so good, when for many, they have many fewer choices than families of disabled people.

Lanzarote1938

FBaby wrote: »

This is what gets to me, this assumption that 'normal' families have it all so good, when for many, they have many fewer choices than families of disabled people.

I would suggest that in many cases they also have less money and time. None of the posters complaining about cuts have yet to say how much they receive cash and other benefits from the public purse. However most of us can use the benefit checker to estimate and it can be quite a revelation.

Ames

FBaby wrote: »

Why are you assuming that all 'normal' families are able to take their kids to swimming lessons?

Not every family can afford these, let alone take them to their lessons, this is why schools offer swimming lessons as part of the curriculum.

Not every parent drive and many will take their kids where they have to go using public transport, or not at all if public transport is not reliable.

This is what gets to me, this assumption that 'normal' families have it all so good, when for many, they have many fewer choices than families of disabled people.

I wasn't assuming anything. A previous poster mentioned taking kids to swimming lessons and I replied to that. You could change it to visiting grandparents, going for a walk in the park, visiting friends in the next town...

CTcelt1988

This is now turning into a benefit bashing thread, not what this thread was supposed to be about.

FBaby

This is now turning into a benefit bashing thread, not what this thread was supposed to be about.

Pointing out that 'normal' families don't all get to do certain things because of lack of transport doesn't make it a benefit bashing post.