Negative changes to the Motability scheme as of 1st January 2017.

bigbulldog

Jackieboy wrote: »

"A disabled"?:eek:

Is that really the best you can do ,so sad.

lisa110rry

/\/\ Come on, the word "person" was clearly accidentally omitted.

The only issue I have with the original post, and I'm genuinely just politely asking, is the circumstances in which your husband uses your Motability car for business (" if he runs out of time before his next meeting")? I know that I must never use my husband's (VW Tiguan automatic - for accessibility reasons) car unless I am doing so directly in his best interests, eg running him to hospital. Rather, I drive my own much-loved 14 year old Honda CR-V in winter, or my even older roadster in summer. When my husband was invited to visit our son and daughter in law abroad for five weeks, I actually phoned Motability to ask if I could run it to work and back once a week and do one longer run to clear the DPF in his absence, since the last time he was away for a long time the vehicle shut down and we had to call out the breakdown for it. There was much discussion before permission was given. No way I was going to invalidate the insurance!

FBaby

The second paragraph about charities paying more for the convenience shows you know very little on how the Motability scheme works as the majority of cars come with electric mirrors etc as standard and to regards to top cars then they would pay up to £3000 of there own money for the advance payment for the privilege.

I'm confused then. If that's the case, what's the complaint? If you don't want to rely on the courtesy of your partner, then surely it is fair that you should pay extra to have a better spec car?

No point missed,so you are assuming that a disabled has to be a couple what about a single person or a couple that are both disabled

Mmm, if single, then they wouldn't need to readjust anything? As for couples who both happen to suffer from a disability where both are unable to adjust mirrors, I would expect to be fall under the exceptional rules as I don't expect it to be common circumstances.

bigbulldog

FBaby wrote: »

I'm confused then. If that's the case, what's the complaint? If you don't want to rely on the courtesy of your partner, then surely it is fair that you should pay extra to have a better spec car?

That's not the point I'm trying to make.

yours and other posts on this thread assume that because Motability is a registered charity is that they give cars away and I can assure you they don't.

FBaby wrote: »

Mmm, if single, then they wouldn't need to readjust anything? As for couples who both happen to suffer from a disability where both are unable to adjust mirrors, I would expect to be fall under the exceptional rules as I don't expect it to be common circumstances.

How can you adjust the mirrors to exactly to be in the same position as it was before you can't and whether it exceptional or not if you have a couple that are both disabled then that would probably be impossible for them to do it at all..

rockingbilly

bigbulldog wrote: »

How can you adjust the mirrors to exactly to be in the same position as it was before you can't and whether it exceptional or not if you have a couple that are both disabled then that would probably be impossible for them to do it at all..

My car does exactly that. My wife and I are totally different in height and build and each of us has our own settings (steering wheel, seat and all mirrors). All that we have to do is press the personal memory button (1 for me and 2 for my wife) the car just does the rest.

easy

rockingbilly wrote: »

My car does exactly that. My wife and I are totally different in height and build and each of us has our own settings (steering wheel, seat and all mirrors). All that we have to do is press the personal memory button (1 for me and 2 for my wife) the car just does the rest.

Lovely, what is it? I have been looking for an auto estate with that facility on the motability scheme. What was your advance payment?

rockingbilly

easy wrote: »

Lovely, what is it? I have been looking for an auto estate with that facility on the motability scheme. What was your advance payment?

I came out of the Motability scheme in June 2013 as I saw it as a waste of money - renting a car that could be removed from me at any time under the then new PIP benefit rules.

I bought an ex demo 6 months old with 2000 miles on the clock BMW 530d.Lux The garage that I bought it from had put over £10,000 of extras on it when they bought it! It is a fantastic car, brilliant fuel consumption and low tax (but it is zero as it is registered as a disable car)
It cost £24950, After putting down a deposit I took out a 4 year finance deal 0% with the monthly payment equal to the DLA - HRM payment.
Best car I have ever owned AND it doesn't go back if I fail the PIP transition.

easy

rockingbilly wrote: »

It cost £24950, After putting down a deposit I took out a 4 year finance deal 0% with the monthly payment equal to the DLA - HRM payment.

Yes but ... whilst the deposit may be similar to an advance payment, your monthly payments equal to your DLA payment don't include your insurance, servicing and tyres do they (and I'm guessing they are all relatively pricey on a model like yours) ??

AND it doesn't go back if I fail the PIP transition

but you will need to continue paying the finance tho'. I'm guessing you have the means to do that. Oh and if you have a motability car and lose your DLA/PIP you can ask motability to sell you the car, if you can set-up your own finance.

easy

However, just to highlight one of the OP's main points again ..
The change was made without any warning or pre-information, and as far as I'm aware, without any consultation at all with the service users. Surely we should have been given the opportunity to put our views about this ?

Read back through the first post. El-Jackal had spent time doing research and going for test drives etc, then having made a decision was unable to follow that through, so it has wasted their time and energy, and that of the dealers.

As I said last week, if ordinary car buyers had suddenly been told they weren't allowed to have specific cars which they had already chosen, because someone they didn't know thought they shouldn't, there would be an outcry.
But because we are disabled we just have this imposed upon us with no warning, and are expected not to complain.

As I said before, the motability scheme has been excellent for me, and still continues to offer a good service. But cutting it back without prior announcement was a poor choice of action by whoever made that decision.

Gooseberry1

The problem is that we dont have a choice with regard to the Motability Scheme. If we receive the allowance, Motability Operations (which is a profit making company - they made more than £125m last year) is the only company who have the right to receive the PIP or DLA allowance direct from the government and the only company who are able to access the VAT advantages that make them c44% cheaper than a normal lease. Effectively they are a monopoly who make the decision over what we can choose. Im not sure who makes the decision but someone at Motability - presumably Mike Betts their CEO who earned more than £900k last year - has decided unilaterally that we shouldn't be able to choose higher price cars anymore even though the allowance is non means tested. Its probably time that some competition was introduced with other leasing companies able to enjoy the direct payment and VAT advantages that Motability Operations enjoy. This could potentially increase choice and reduce prices for all disabled people