- This topic has 8 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks, 6 days ago by
.
- Topic
Appreciate this has probably been discussed in another thread but want to ask the question
With the news/rumours of AP’s having VAT added onto them in July, can we presume that it will effect all AP’s
For example, if a car’s AP is currently £4,499 and we assume it doesn’t increase in July then the new AP would be £5,398? Top end cars with a AP of £6,999 would then come in at £8,398.80 which is utterly obscene
If that’s genuinely going to be the case then what’s the Government’s/Motability’s end game here? That’s going to price a lot of people out of cars, some of which are needed.
Has all the scaremongering and negativity got to them? Has any other MP challenged this? Why are the disabled being targeted here?
- Replies
At the end of the day you will only pay what you are willing/or can afford to pay, no one is forcing you.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
It doesnt really matter.
The AP is an arbitrary number, and that number changes every quarter.
You will lease what you can afford.
Appreciate this has probably been discussed in another thread but want to ask the question With the news/rumours of AP’s having VAT added onto them in July, can we presume that it will effect all AP’s For example, if a car’s AP is currently £4,499 and we assume it doesn’t increase in July then the new AP would be £5,398? Top end cars with a AP of £6,999 would then come in at £8,398.80 which is utterly obscene If that’s genuinely going to be the case then what’s the Government’s/Motability’s end game here? That’s going to price a lot of people out of cars, some of which are needed. Has all the scaremongering and negativity got to them? Has any other MP challenged this? Why are the disabled being targeted here?
I think that your assumptions and calculations are correct.
As for “what’s the end game” we shall see from the Timms review in the Autumn. However, if they go along with what politicians from most parties, many newspapers and the great British public on social media all seem to be calling for, I think there’s a real chance that the scheme may revert to it’s original purpose. This would mean that eligibility would revert to those with physical disabilities only and there would be a disconnect from the current situation where mental health conditions, which were reclassified as disabilities, are treated the same. In order to avoid discrimination claims, they could disconnect the automatic gateway entitlement that currently gives people with higher rate mobility component access to Motability, by changing the questions. Those with mental health issues could still receive a higher rate payment but, due to which particular aspects trigger that payment, they may or may not be eligible for access to Motability. I have absolutely no clue though, and this is all just pure speculation in response to your question 😂
Motability has already used term like “it’s original core values” and “refocus on our main objectives”. That should give some indication as to where they’re thinking of going.
There’s also been mention by Motability of “Cost saving measures” including setting our lease to be more aligned to commercial leases – which reads as the 20,000 mile annual allowance will drop significantly although there’s no indication of to what. There has also been mention of abolishing support in Europe, which means the insurance and recovery covers we have will be UK only.
I’ve gone down the rant on “Policy of Envy” many times, several on here but that’s what we’re being battered with, the Daily Mail readers being unable to afford what is given to us is clearly entirely unfair and utterly wrong. Mostly because, unlike Motability, those working and earning above the 40% tax threshold will be able to lease a car with all the benefits we are given but with a government assistance package of 40%, yep a person earning £70,000 a year could lease any car in the country and have the government pay 40% in the form of tax not paid on the lease payment. Salary Sacrifice is costing this country millions each and every month but they’re focused on the disabled community getting “Free” cars whilst scamming the system. Apparently we’re also all work shy lazy buggers who have no interest in working. Oh, and before you think that voting this lot out would make things better, Reform and the Conservative party have both said they’d be targeting the massive welfare bill, with a view on those earning significant lifestyles by claiming all sorts of benefits as apparently there’s people earning the equivalent of £50,000 a year whilst doing nothing.
Sorry, back to topic, The future of the scheme is unknown currently but will be a more expensive offer for less of a service. Effectively, we’ll be temporarily punished until the Timms review at which point we’ll more likely than not be battered again.
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
Doesn’t following a journey cover mental health, as we as things like, Dementia/other brain conditions, cognitive/learning disability’s, stroke …..
It will be much harder to disconnect access to the scheme, than it was to grant access by making mental health a disability (2010?). Could you imagine the uproar, when (not if) they tried it!
@Glos-Guy Doesn’t following a journey cover mental health, as we as things like, Dementia/other brain conditions, cognitive/learning disability’s, stroke ….. It will be much harder to disconnect access to the scheme, than it was to grant access by making mental health a disability (2010?). Could you imagine the uproar, when (not if) they tried it!
Yes all those conditions mentioned allow for sufficient points to achieve enhanced mobility. The problem as those complaining see it amongst those mental health conditions come Neurodivergence and anxiety.
For example my daughter is diagnosed with combined Autism and ADHD and suffers severe social anxiety, to the extent that going shopping on a quiet day results in a severe migraine and, at best, hours in bed. She could easily achieve an award of enhanced mobility purely on mental health. The issue is that this is the exact outcome that is causing problems. The headline reads “Motability cars for anxiety” painting the youth of today as snowflakes claiming benefits for anxiety and ADHD. Having seen the impact of anxiety, at the severe end of the scale, the implication is far from the reality but since when has the truth mattered.
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
@Glos-Guy Doesn’t following a journey cover mental health, as we as things like, Dementia/other brain conditions, cognitive/learning disability’s, stroke ….. It will be much harder to disconnect access to the scheme, than it was to grant access by making mental health a disability (2010?). Could you imagine the uproar, when (not if) they tried it!
I have no idea @kezo As I said, I was purely speculating based on what Labour, the Conservates, Reform UK and most newspapers have said that they think should happen. I agree that, whether people agree with it or not, it would be a nightmare to unravel. I don’t see them reclassifying mental health issues back to health conditions, rather than disabilities, as that would result in no end of legal challenges. I could see, however, a complete re-writing of the PIP questions, scoring and criteria. That way, you could have two people who both qualify for higher rate PIP, but only the one who has derived the points through a physical disability gets a gateway to Motability. It would basically put things back to where they were 5+ years ago, but by using a new route rather than back peddling on the last changes. As I say, complete and utter speculation on my part, based on zero knowledge 😂
I tend to think along the same lines as Glos Guy
Just to add to the mix
I do not think anything so selective predetermined and manufactured should be able to be called a review
Toothless Timms is attached to strings imo and has no final say in what is imo a charade
The predetermined outcome imo will be sold as needed to be done to meet the OBR targets
Me thinks present APs and VAT concerns will soon pale into insignificance
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.