Motability question

Car_54

Bigwheels1111 said:

chrisw said:

unforeseen said:

ISTR  a post on this forum where the police took a stricter line on whether the journey was for the benefit of the claimant. 

Unlikely. The nominated drivers are each insured for social, domestic and pleasure and commuting with business use considered on request. Nowhere does it specify that it must be for the benefit of the claimant, that would be difficult to quantify as above.

sevenhills said:

That sounds very strict, are these cars ultra low mileage when they are sold on?

Not necessarily. Users are allowed up to 20k miles per year. So could be 60k after 3 years or up to 100k after 5 years.

Bigwheels1111 said:

The other is they can just change their mind and take back the car.

No they can't, unless you lose your entitlement to higher rate mobility allowance. 

No they can't, unless you lose your entitlement to higher rate mobility allowance. 

Exactly my point.

A friend who lost their leg 30 years ago was found they could walk unaided and lost the car.

Well i think he could hop for 10/15 feet.

One leg. 15 feet?

Grey_Critic

Bigwheels1111 said:

No they can't, unless you lose your entitlement to higher rate mobility allowance. 

Exactly my point.

A friend who lost their leg 30 years ago was found they could walk unaided and lost the car.

Well i think he could hop for 10/15 feet.

No surprise there - they only go after the easy ones. My late sister was observed walking ffom the corner shop where she worked and deemed fit. She had never claimed not to be able to walk- she had calipers on both legs but that was ignored.

MouldyOldDough

Grey_Critic said:

Bigwheels1111 said:

No they can't, unless you lose your entitlement to higher rate mobility allowance. 

Exactly my point.

A friend who lost their leg 30 years ago was found they could walk unaided and lost the car.

Well i think he could hop for 10/15 feet.

No surprise there - they only go after the easy ones. My late sister was observed walking ffom the corner shop where she worked and deemed fit. She had never claimed not to be able to walk- she had calipers on both legs but that was ignored.

Hope she appealed? 

Spoonie_Turtle

Bigwheels1111 said:

chrisw said:

unforeseen said:

ISTR  a post on this forum where the police took a stricter line on whether the journey was for the benefit of the claimant. 

Unlikely. The nominated drivers are each insured for social, domestic and pleasure and commuting with business use considered on request. Nowhere does it specify that it must be for the benefit of the claimant, that would be difficult to quantify as above.

sevenhills said:

That sounds very strict, are these cars ultra low mileage when they are sold on?

Not necessarily. Users are allowed up to 20k miles per year. So could be 60k after 3 years or up to 100k after 5 years.

Bigwheels1111 said:

The other is they can just change their mind and take back the car.

No they can't, unless you lose your entitlement to higher rate mobility allowance. 

No they can't, unless you lose your entitlement to higher rate mobility allowance. 

Exactly my point.

A friend who lost their leg 30 years ago was found they could walk unaided and lost the car.

Well i think he could hop for 10/15 feet.

Single leg amputees don't automatically fulfill the criteria for higher rate mobility, as 'walking' for PIP means with at least one biological foot on the ground.  So if they can usually use a prosthetic leg and/or crutches without severe pain or other problems for more than 20m*, they wouldn't qualify (unless they have difficulty planning or following journeys).  

*Subject to the usual reliably/repeatedly/safely/etc. qualifiers.  [Using a prosthetic limb when the residual limb has a blister that needs to heal, for example, would not meet the safety criterion.]

MouldyOldDough

OK I have had it confirmed by Motability 
My wife is covered to drive the car without my being with her when she needs a break from caring for me such as trips to the garden centre!