JS as I said, it was only a point of view.
However as a fan of the Forum and a regular contributor, JS the more I read your defense of Motability Operations (not to be confused with Motability the Charity) I have to wonder what your background is and how many years you have been a Motability customer, or indeed if you yourself are the Motability customer (sorry if I have missed your previous explanation).
I think it would be helpful if all the host and all moderators as well as all contributors) declared if they were actually receivers of DLA/Pip/War Pensions, and entitled to a Motability car or if they were beneficiaries of someone else who receives DLA/Pip War Pensions and is entitled to a Motability car.
On your first point JS, how many companies/charity’s do you think would have had the funds or given the opportunity to start up Motability in 1977, (which effectively but not directly replaced the Government’s Blue Invacar, as there was short a gap, which was replaced with DLA), but then went on to now have massive profits at the expense of their customers. The fact is that the Banks only got the contract (not open to tender, as far as I know), from the Government. Also as you say, at that time, how many companies would have had the funds to buy cars without the Government assurance that their money was safer than any other HP companies, as the Government was assuring payments (if the person lived) were met, unlike the gamble HP companies had to take.
It was assured that Motability Operations would reach profits, as it’s customers/members would have to pay the price to assure it’s profitability, but it was never meant to reach abusively high profitability.
On your second point JS, can you please clarify how you know that Motability Operations can only supply the Motability Charity (my understanding is that they don’t supply the Charity) with enough money to cover six weeks of stock of cars.
How could you possibly know that without significantly increasing AP’s, any competitor could show a profitable business plan for at least a few years.
My point was that It would be run not as a business needing to make profit, unlike Motability Operations, but as a Charity or by the Government (who supplied the Blue Invacar and DLA/Pip/War Pensions), which would be members interest led and not to be based on making large profits, at the expense of the vulnerable members that it was set up to look after.
As always, just my opinion, however that does not mean that I am going to just accept anybody else opinion even If I accept and respect their right to disagree with mine.
As a polite and respectful member of this forum for a few years, I am concerned that it now appears that the site moderators, who I appreciate and respect, seem less open to alternative views which do not praise Motability or vary from their own views.
As I have said many times, I am both a critic and appreciative fan of Motability (both the Charity and Operations), however I do appreciate my (and others) freedom of speech on this Forum.