Motability Scheme

[Olivera]

Following on from the other thread about 3-wheeled disability vehicles, it seems we have gone full circle on this.

For the last few weeks a local paper has been running a full-page 'motability' advert from the local BMW garage, consisting of large picture of a fully bodykitted, specced-up new 330d. I can only assume from this advert that bimmers are now free to the great horde of incapacity claimants. If one is not partial to BMWs then don't fret, the new Land Rover Discovery TDiV6 is also available.

A quick browse of the web reveals the following 'motability' facts:

* A new car every three years
* Free tyres
* Insurance
* Road tax
* Servicing, maintenance and repairs
* Breakdown cover
* Window or windscreen replacement

My questions are threefold: Is the 'motability' scheme the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow it seems? What's the point of actually working to buy a car? And lastly, can I expect to see Joey Deacon waft past in his BMW M6?

[Ubertractor]

Might I be so bold as to suggest looking up some more info on the Motability website before ranting?

Is it a pot of gold? Er, nah, I'd rather not have incurable lung disease thank you. A car is piss poor compensation.

They're not free. On most one has to pay a deposit. If you have a poverty spec town car there's little or no deposit.

Choose something jolly like a BMW 320i ES auto and you chuck £7229 at it. Which you don't get back.

Add the handing over of one's 4 weekly Mobility allowance of roughly £170 and over 3 years you pay a total of £16069 with nothing at the end but an empty space on the driveway. You don't get cashback for any optional extras either.

So you'll rarely see a really flash Motability car as it's cash down the drain. Usually they're MPVs and small family cars.

What's the point of working to buy a car? Oh dear, you really have missed the point.

Will you see Joey Deacon waft past in his M6? Not with your head that far up your arse you won't.

Edited by Ubertractor on Sunday 24th December 19:14

[Balmoral Green]

Folks are entitled to, and get, a high rate disability living allowance. What they choose to do with it is their business, not ours. They can cash it in for the monetary value, or surrender it for a car on either a three year contract or a five year lease. Motability is just a finance house that facilitates the contract or the lease, thats all. So no matter what the vehicle or the deal on motability, it is nothing to do with the award of the allowance at all.

So if you want to rant about some sort of state scrounging, fair enough, but the choice or deal on any particular car is not relevant to that argument.

[tvrgit]

Never let ignorance of the facts get in the way of a good rant though!

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

They should get a Knight Industries Two Thousand.

[who me ?]

New car every 3 years - yes
Free tyres - yes - but only 4 ,any more and you pay -
likewise they say what make etc to fit.
Free insurance - with a £75 glass excess and no no claim bonus scheme
- heard some people saying that the insurance is dear compared to privat ,especially if you've got
a large NCB.
Servicing repairs & maintenance subject to fair wear and tear and breakdown cover.
Free milage 12000 per year -paid yearly and averaged out over three - excess
--first 3000 @5p,next 5000@8p and next 8000 @10p
Majority of use is for disabled person
Cant find anything other than getting approval for modifications -
but at end of hire they must be p

[olf]

Olivera said:

Following on from the other thread about 3-wheeled disability vehicles, it seems we have gone full circle on this.

For the last few weeks a local paper has been running a full-page 'motability' advert from the local BMW garage, consisting of large picture of a fully bodykitted, specced-up new 330d. I can only assume from this advert that bimmers are now free to the great horde of incapacity claimants. If one is not partial to BMWs then don't fret, the new Land Rover Discovery TDiV6 is also available.

A quick browse of the web reveals the following 'motability' facts:

* A new car every three years
* Free tyres
* Insurance
* Road tax
* Servicing, maintenance and repairs
* Breakdown cover
* Window or windscreen replacement

My questions are threefold: Is the 'motability' scheme the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow it seems? What's the point of actually working to buy a car? And lastly, can I expect to see Joey Deacon waft past in his BMW M6?

Yep my Dad has a Discovery TDiV6 on a motability scheme. It's the only vehicle he get into and sit comfortably in, he paid a big amount up front to get it and he only gets the standard allowance.

Now.... whats your funking problem again or would you like to stick to your generalised BS?

[pwig]

[quote=who me ?]New car every 3 years - yes
Free tyres - yes - but only 4 ,any more and you pay -
likewise they say what make etc to fit.
Free insurance - with a £75 glass excess and no no claim bonus scheme
- heard some people saying that the insurance is dear compared to privat ,especially if you've got
a large NCB.
Servicing repairs & maintenance subject to fair wear and tear and breakdown cover.
Free milage 12000 per year -paid yearly and averaged out over three - excess
--first 3000 @5p,next 5000@8p and next 8000 @10p
Majority of use is for disabled person
Cant find anything other than getting approval for modifications -
but at end of hire they must be p
[/quote]

Right, they can have as many tyres as they want now.

And insurance is all included.

[skeggysteve]

If you really want a rant try the Motability ( EDIT I ment to say mobility ) scheme.

If you have higher rate allowance you can buy a mobility scooter or wheelchair.

What they don't tell you is the people that run the scheme are a mobility company and will rip you off.

As in £4000 for an item that can be brought at c£1200.

I think the government call it private initiative

Edited by skeggysteve on Monday 25th December 18:11

[MrFlibbles]

What Olivera should have said:

The Motability scheme: What an excellent way for the less mobile to be able to have a car that they can depend on, regardless of their personal financial circumstances.

It is christmas after all

[keithyboy]

Olivera said:

Following on from the other thread about 3-wheeled disability vehicles, it seems we have gone full circle on this.

For the last few weeks a local paper has been running a full-page 'motability' advert from the local BMW garage, consisting of large picture of a fully bodykitted, specced-up new 330d. I can only assume from this advert that bimmers are now free to the great horde of incapacity claimants. If one is not partial to BMWs then don't fret, the new Land Rover Discovery TDiV6 is also available.

A quick browse of the web reveals the following 'motability' facts:

* A new car every three years
* Free tyres
* Insurance
* Road tax
* Servicing, maintenance and repairs
* Breakdown cover
* Window or windscreen replacement

My questions are threefold: Is the 'motability' scheme the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow it seems? What's the point of actually working to buy a car? And lastly, can I expect to see Joey Deacon waft past in his BMW M6?

You really do need to think before you post. It's offensive to those who are less fortunate than you and aren't in good health for whatever reason - I have a very close friend in exactly this situation.

[Olivera]

Ubertractor said:

Choose something jolly like a BMW 320i ES auto and you chuck £7229 at it. Which you don't get back.

Add the handing over of one's 4 weekly Mobility allowance of roughly £170 and over 3 years you pay a total of £16069 with nothing at the end but an empty space on the driveway. You don't get cashback for any optional extras either.

So you'll rarely see a really flash Motability car as it's cash down the drain. Usually they're MPVs and small family cars.

Edited by Ubertractor on Sunday 24th December 19:14

Ok, lets take your example of a BMW 320i ES auto. On the motability scheme you pay £7229 up front, out of your own cash. Let's not factor in allowances signed away as that's handed to you on a plate, not earned. Your total costs over three years that you have paid for (with real money) is £7229.

Now lets estimate the costs if I bought the same car privately and ran it for three years. The purchase price, new tyres, maintenance, road tax, insurance etc would easily, easily amount to say £30k. I may recoup £12k when I sell it, but overall I have paid £18,000 over three years. You have paid £7229. This is still a massive subsidy.

Also, you state "you'll rarely see a really flash Motability car". If that was the case why did BMW have a full page advert for several weeks in a scottish national newspaper advertising motability BMWs? Answer, because increasingly large (and bogus?) amounts of people are claiming incapacity benefit, so it is therefore a substantial market.

Look, I'm not arguing against the motability scheme in general. What I am complaining about is luxury vehicles (BMWs, MX-5, Land Rover Discovery) being available via the scheme. The primary goal of a motability vehicle should be to get you from A to B. Badge and luxury shouldn't factor in to it.

By allowing vehicles such as BMWs and Land Rovers into the scheme they are giving absolutely no incentive to those claiming to ever leave the scheme. Why work your way to a BMW when you can progress up the mobility pecking order to get one?

[tvrgit]

Olivera said:

Let's not factor in allowances signed away as that's handed to you on a plate, not earned.

You do not "claim" disability living allowance. It is an allowance for those who are unable to walk normal distances, to help them pay for the extra costs of getting around by taxi.

If they choose to use that allowance to lease a car under the Motability scheme, then that is a real cost to them. You cannot simply factor that out as you have. They can get a basic car at more or less the cots of the allowance, but if they choose to add more of their own money to get a better car then who the f""k do you think you are to tell them what they can and cannot choose?

Your first post was a bit silly. When you are in a hole, stop digging, you're not doing yourself any favours.

Edited to add: oh and those who are "claiming" cannot normally ever stop - most disabilities are for life, and the allowance lasts that long.

Edited by tvrgit on Sunday 24th December 20:15

[Balmoral Green]

The monthly allowance is the same, no matter what the vehicle. There are cheaper cars out there that do not need any deposit at all, nor do they even take the full monthly allowance, there is some allowance left over too. There are cars that take do the full allowance, but there is still no deposit. There are also top of the range cars available too, but you have to pay a deposit as well as surrender the whole allowance. You lose the deposit, it is all dead money.

None of this is relevant though, as the allowance itslef hasnt got anything to do with means, it is like child benefit, rich folks get it too.

All motability is is a finance company, they take your deposit and your allowance as the monthly payment, at the end of the contract the vehicle will have a residual. Its just maths that all. Someone who has a BMW over a Matiz is not gaining any extra benefit, they are paying for the better car themselves, thats all. The fact that they have the money to do this in the 1st place doesnt mean they are less worthy of the allowance than the folks that can only afford the Matiz.

I say again, the car is not relevant.

They get a book, they can spend it how they like.

[wolf1]

You sir (OP) are a cock!

Stick your 'it's not fair i've had to work' attitude right up where the sun doesn't shine.

My father had a motability vehicle as he couldn't walk anymore than 100 yds after contracting asbestosis. He was obviously so happy to be dieing so that he could have a FREE (as you put it) car to tootle around in

Not bad eh! die at 54 just so he could have a free car! Why didn't anyone else think of doing that!!!!!!!

[Olivera]

Balmoral Green said:

I say again, the car is not relevant.

I would argue the car is completely relevent. It is an established fact that many able bodied people view incapacity/disability benefits as a con to never work. Many such people have shifted from long term unemployed to long term incapacity benefits because the money is better. The numbers have trebled since the 70s IIRC. In fact the government wants to overhall the whole system because so much fraud is occuring.

Now, my point is that by adding luxury and sports vehicles to the mobility scheme, gives a further disincentive to those on these benefits to ever leave them. It is also, in my opinion, a complete bastardisation of the 'motability' principle and a further nail in the coffin to the credibility of 'benefits'.

[MJK 24]

Olivera said:

Balmoral Green said:

I say again, the car is not relevant.

I would argue the car is completely relevent. It is an established fact that many able bodied people view incapacity/disability benefits as a con to never work. Many such people have shifted from long term unemployed to long term incapacity benefits because the money is better. The numbers have trebled since the 70s IIRC. In fact the government wants to overhall the whole system because so much fraud is occuring.

Now, my point is that by adding luxury and sports vehicles to the mobility scheme, gives a further disincentive to those on these benefits to ever leave them. It is also, in my opinion, a complete bastardisation of the 'motability' principle and a further nail in the coffin to the credibility of 'benefits'.

So what if a chap with no legs, has a few quid in the bank, but doesn't want a bum basic Ka. He wants an Audi A6 instead. Why shoouldn't he have the option of chucking a few quid in the pot to upgrade?

[spaximus]

If we take the emotion out of this for a moment. I used to work for a company that did motability schemed cars, it as others have said. you get the same allowance to spend on what ever car you want. However, there were literally loads who were not as ill as some of those who are mentioned on here. I certainly would not swap my health for a car, but to many it is a pot of gold, as I said in the other thread why should someone who can walk two hours around a car boot sale get a subsidized car? My father is ill and does not qualify for one as his illness came after he finished work IIRC it ends at 60 years old, after a life time in the mines. I have no problem with the principle of providing transport free to those in need of it but I do object to the way that many have been deemed "disabled" when clearly they are not. Even the goverment is asking for this to be reviewed as certain areas are way out of the averages. IIRC South Wales has many more "disabled" than anywhere else, it is claimed doctors sign the forms to avoid the arguments that ensue when they refuse and the subsequent enquiries. These are the ones who give others a bad name by their actions, the sad fact though is all the goverment will do is force some of the soft targets out of the scheme but the real problem abusers will still get a car and brag about it in the pub.

[tvrgit]

Olivera said:

Balmoral Green said:

I say again, the car is not relevant.

I would argue the car is completely relevent. It is an established fact that many able bodied people view incapacity/disability benefits as a con to never work. Many such people have shifted from long term unemployed to long term incapacity benefits because the money is better. The numbers have trebled since the 70s IIRC. In fact the government wants to overhall the whole system because so much fraud is occuring.

Now, my point is that by adding luxury and sports vehicles to the mobility scheme, gives a further disincentive to those on these benefits to ever leave them. It is also, in my opinion, a complete bastardisation of the 'motability' principle and a further nail in the coffin to the credibility of 'benefits'.

There may be problems with the benefit, but qualifying for disability allowance is not easy - you don't just get up one day and say "I think I'll sign on as disabled". There is also a difference between "incapacity" benefits and disability living allowance. Please please get a grip of what you are talking about before shooting from the hip.

Disability Living Allowance is an ESSENTIAL allowance to most of those who qualify for it. Motability IS NOT A CHEAP WAY OF GETTING A CAR - but for those who NEED one it offers a way of getting about. If they choose to add more of their own money to get a better car then why not?

Yes I agree that there are some who abuse the system. That does not mean that the system is wrong - it means that the abuse needs to be stamped out. That is where the problem lies - but you cannot crack down on honest disabled just because a few people abuse the system.

It would also be helpful if there was more of a crackdown on people who park in disabled spaces, or across dropped crossings.

[convert]

My mother was a recipient of a Motability car, a bog standard 1.6 Focus. Yes she could have chosen to add extra money to her benefit, and get a better car but she didn't.

Just like anyone can choose to stump up their own cash to buy a better car.

No matter which vehicle you get the allowance is the same.

Unfortunately my Mother passed away earlier this year, and trying to get a proof of NCB for my Father prooved impossible.

Like many others my Mother and Father have worked all their lives, contributing to the system, as do I.

The scheme is a very good one for people with disabilities, as it allows them a reliable form of transport, that is essential when keeping hospital appointments etc.

I can sort of understand why you're upset that some people might be able to drive a better car than you, but would you really like to trade places with them?

No thought not.


Merry Christmas you A***hole.