I think you have to put the scheme changes into context of what was also happening around the time of the ‘car cull’ in 2011.
Remember that the UK was in a period of ‘austerity’ post the financial crisis. The coalition government, and in particular the then Chancellor (Gideon Osborne) was cutting back all public services, benefits and anything else he could possibly cut to reduce government borrowing (the deficit).
There was a perception (and to some extent still is) amongst some people that disabled people get their Motability cars ‘free’ (Yes, readers hereabouts know differently, but many non-disabled people don’t, or do not want to know).
Thus, at the time it could have been viewed that to permit people ‘on benefits’ to drive round in a ‘free’ Range Rover whilst others were struggling (or had lost jobs post the financial crisis etc), was politically unacceptable.
After the DM article shone a torch on the subject, who knows what political pressure was put on Motability? We may have to wait until papers are published under the 30-year rule (so circa 2041) to find out. That is if they are in fact released then.
The government did not even have to say or do anything publicly at the time, but were apparently content to let the DM and its readership openly do the dirty for them. However, no doubt ‘wheels within wheels’ were moving in the background.
I also think Motability had a portent that change was coming before the DM article was published. In earlier price guides actual AP’s for expensive vehicles were promulgated. But then, circa early 2011 (before the Daily Mail article), it changed to any vehicle with an AP over £10k becoming ‘POA’ in the quarterly price guides! A portent of things to come?
In the more ‘diversity aware’ times we are currently in, one would like to think pressure would not again be put on Motability to restrict choice. But in saying that, with the Covid borrowings the government has taken on totally dwarfing the financial crisis borrowings, who knows what is around the corner?