I think we also have to take into account the vast diversity of the scheme’s customers. We literally spread from the loss of benefit for a car being a considered stretch to affordability, all the way up to those who have the income/savings to buy any car they wish (within reason) but can choose to use the scheme.
When you think some are choosing cars that are in keeping with the cars they’d be choosing should they not need the scheme, having cars like BMW and Mercedes is a requirement. For others, these luxuries are unattainable, even with the advantages the scheme provides and having any new car is beyond the capability they’d normally have. Without looking at salary sacrifice schemes and other financial considerations, the scheme offers a hugely essential opportunity for some people to have a reliable car they’d never have otherwise had.
So, when considering whether the scheme is fit for purpose, the answer has to be yes purely because there are numbers of people who would be unable to have an independent mobility without it. However, there’s also people for whom the selection from the scheme is vastly inferior to the options they’d have purchasing elsewhere and it’s purely a cost benefit from staying on the scheme.
I'm Autistic, if I say something you find offensive, please let me know, I can guarantee it was unintentional.
I'll try to give my honest opinion but am always open to learning.
Mark