@mitch Congratulations on an excellent letter. As others have said, whilst I also call Reeves ‘Rachel from Accounts’ and now also ‘Fiscal Drag Queen’, it’s best to avoid it in a serious letter. It might also help understanding to avoid terms such as ‘AP’ and use the full terminology. Those reading it won’t be as familiar with the scheme and the acronyms as we are.
Minor point, but the BMWs on the scheme lately have almost all been M-Sport models, which are actually the top end versions (other than the sports division M models which are way above Motability price levels), so that particular point isn’t accurate. Your point about the far better residual values of premium brands is spot on though.
If it wasn’t for the fact that my wife and I have determined that the scheme is no longer for us, I would be firing off letters myself. The main points that I’d be making are that Motability cars that are perceived as being ‘free’ actually cost us a minimum of £12,000, even if they have zero AP. That’s probably more than most people away from the scheme pay to run their cars over 3 years! Also, I’d point out (as you did) that premium cars don’t cost the tax payer a penny more than a non-premium car, and the removal of them is purely about optics and is mean spirited (that’s me being polite).
I read your letter to my wife and it made us both appreciate the impact of these changes on those who rely on the scheme. We are very fortunate that we can afford to run a new car privately, although I’ll probably buy used as it makes far more sense. I don’t feel the need to have brand new cars – in fact with all the ruddy bings and bongs and distractions of the latest models, I’d like to get back to enjoying driving again, which means getting a car that’s a few years older.
I hope that things work out for you when your next change comes around. We had pretty much decided to leave the scheme before last week’s announcements, but I’ve been amazed at how many people are now thinking the same thing.