- This topic has 38 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Topic
<p style=”text-align: left;”>Why is it as a disabled driver who needs an automatic, as I suspect many others do were penalised by the extra cost of an automatic compared to the manual equivalent car.</p>
- Replies
Always been that way, auto’s apparently more expensive to produce as much lower numbers especially in the UK.
Not sure that’s the case, Greg. About half the cars on the scheme are automatics and quite a few are available at zero AP.
Obviously if a particular model of car can be got in manual and automatic versions, Motability will likely have to pay more for the automatic and that will be reflected in the AP. That’s not a penalty, but a reflection of the economics of leasing.
Have to say I agree with Greg on this point. I accept that auto cars are generally more expensive than the manual equivalent. However, when you look at the cost of auto v manual for a private buyer it would appear in most cases that on Motability, proportionately the difference is much higher. Given that many folks’ disabilities give them no option except auto I’ve always thought this rather unfair.
No intention to upset anyone, just a point of fact, but all EVs are automatic so there will be more choice on the scheme as time goes by and we will all be paying the same so no one will be penalised.
The only person who got all his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe.
Anything i post over three lines long please assume it is an article lol.Fair point Brydo !
Shugster they are actually better than automatic as there is no “hunting” for the right gear or delay with an EV, “instant Torque” is delivered every time, like a “dodgem” car on steriods lol.
The only person who got all his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe.
Anything i post over three lines long please assume it is an article lol.Thinking of instant torque – I’m sure many people recall electric milk floats and the chinking sound of all the bottles crashing together in their crates whenever they moved off.
“Ernie” the fastest milkman in the west!
I’ve long argued with Motability that there should be no financial penalty for needing an automatic over a manual.
There should be a difference in AP depending on the spec level and fuel of the vehicle… so a basic level car would be different from the top of the range and petrol, diesel, hybrid, BEV would affect it too.
But they know how many vehicles are auto and how many are manual and it’d be easy to adjust the AP to balance this out. Last time I spoke about it (a good few years ago now?) it was a tiny percentage of all cars were automatic but that’ll have changed (maybe someone knows?)
It’d be easy enough to add £1, £5, £10, £50 or whatever to ever manual car in that models lineup to reduce the price of the automatic.
So maybe the auto prices should go up to support the manuals… ???? At least it shows we have a good range to choose from but doesn’t help to show how many of each are leased.
You’d need to dig deeper into the prices charged… for every automatic sold of any particular model (Tiguan, Focus ST, Corsa for example) how many manuals were sold…. so if 1 Corsa automatic at £100 equals 9 manuals at £0 then everybody pays £10 so it’s level. A tiny increase for the manual drivers and a big saving for the automatic drivers. If Motability find these figures aren’t quite covering it then they adjust them next quarter (or anytime they like cause they’re good at that!)
Rhodgie, I think you’re trying to solve a problem that no longer exists. There is plenty of choice if you need an automatic.
before the advent of electric cars automatics were always more expensive than manual even for private buyers, whilst i am one of those “penalised” for needing an automatic i dont attach any blame to motability, the fact is manufacturers charge more for an auto.
what do people expect motability to subsidise the price???
the government should perhaps do a grant as they do for veterans whose injuries mean they need an auto currently £660 i think but only available once in a 3 year period.
but then i suppose those that just prefer autos would moan.
Plenty of choice yes but still a variation in AP
For example if someone wants the cheapest Ford Focus they can get then a manual is £345 whether petrol or diesel.
If you need an automatic then its £595 for a petrol or £745 for a diesel.
So by needing an auto you’re £250 or £400 more out of pocket ?
Now Motability will know how many more manuals are leased compared to the autos and that extra expenses should be shared out…
Rhodgie, why do you think you’re out of pocket? Because of MrsW’s worsening condition, the last three changes of car have had to be automatics. When we search the Motability site we just look at automatics, the rest of the cars on the scheme are irrelevant as far as we’re concerned so we don’t look at them. We also, because of her condition need heated seats and an electric tailgate. We don’t say if because of needing these things we end up paying more, that we’re out of pocket.
Firstly I drive an EV so they’re all auto anyway so this no longer affects me but it is still an injustice, plus it wasn’t me who started this post but the higher costs of an auto over a manual comes up often (when folk aren’t bickering about EV v ICE ???) so obviously other people aren’t happy either.
Motability is a charity founded to help disabled people get back on the road so they should be doing all they can to achieve that and I don’t think they are.
I was beginning to think you were a manual car driver and that’s why so reticent to agree you should be paying more but as an auto driver I’m amazed you don’t see the injustice in being financially worse off just because of your disability… different it you just couldn’t be bothered changing gear.
Anybody who needs an automatic due to their disability is out of pocket… see my previous post about the Ford Focus, and it’ll be the same story with just about every vehicle on the scheme.
It should be a level playing field, we all get the same level of DLA/PIP so should be paying the same deposit for the same basic means of transport, luxury extras like heated seats, electric tailgate etc are down to personal choice… it’s not that long ago we also had to pay for our own hand controls so thankfully that has changed, maybe the deposits will change soon too ?
No, I don’t think that anyone should be financially worse of because of their disability. More than half the cars on the scheme are automatics, not all have a cheaper manual equivalent like the Focus you are keen to use as an example, and they are there to be chosen. But I’m disappointed that you just see disability as being unable to operate a manual gearbox and every other aid as a luxury. If only life was so simple and everyone’s needs were the same.
@rhodgie I’m sure everyone else who reads this agrees with you regarding this. Just ignore Wigwam he loves to get a reaction out of from people. Just a sad little troll with nothing better to do all day them write ignorant replies all day long.
Mike I don’t understand him either ?♂️
Wigwam it isn’t about the percentage of autos or manuals on the scheme to choose from, it’s about the number of autos or manuals that get leased. You say you don’t want anyone to be financially worse off due to their disability…. but you are!!!! Now you are having to get an auto when previously you had a manual? ?♂️
I picked the Focus cause it’s a common car that most people know about and a lot are likely to choose but you pick any car you like and see the difference in AP…. Nissan, Vauxhall, Audi, BMW, Skoda etc. What car do you drive and we’ll compare that?
Your last 2 sentences don’t have any relevance to this conversation and I feel are an attempt to shift the topic in another direction rather than admit you’re wrong
Rhodgie, what am I wrong about? You think users of the scheme should subsidise through higher APs people who need an automatic, by levelling the AP to that of a manual car. It’s an admirable sentiment but I don’t agree with it
.My last sentences were entirely relevant. As I was trying to make you understand, there’s more to need than a type of gearbox.
Should users who need a large car to contain a wheelchair also have their AP levelled to the same as those cars that are too small to contain a wheelchair?. Should people whose disability prevents them getting into a low car have their AP subsidised by everyone else so a tall car has the same AP as a low car?
And if all that were possible, how are you going to measure that need?. What if I would love to have your Ford Focus automatic for the same price as a manual but don’t have a clinical need. How are you going to stop me taking advantage of it?
As I said, I have no problem with your sentiment, but expand your thinking and recognise that other needs than an auto box also cost more and you would see how it couldn’t work.
And Mike, I notice your lack of any meaningful contribution.
You pick the car you want/need whether that’s an MPV, SUV, convertible….? they all have a different AP. You choose the level of trim you want/need to go on that car and the AP is adjusted to suit.
If you want an auto or a manual that’s a no cost option…. a bit like how everyone subsidises the cost of hand controls and the reduced rate for war pensioners… how all the workers (me!) pay tax to subsidises disabled people (you/us?) getting cars, child benefit, sickness benefit, dole money, TV licences for the blind, free bus travel, free prescription etc etc etc? That’s how society works, everybody pays a little to help out… or should we start charging the war pensioners full price and do away with all Government subsidies?
I thought Mike was very insightful ??????
Personally I think that for disabled people automatics ought to be the default position with manuals having to be asked for if desired.
Motability with its financial clout should be aiming to major in automatics and not be afraid to name and shame those manufacturers who try to rip off disabled people by making them pay a premium.
Personally I think for disabled people hand controls out to be the default position. Let’s all stereotype the disabled!
Rhodgie – I’m prepared to be corrected, but I don’t believe that war pensioner rates are subsidised at all. The benefit that they sacrifice is greater than the higher rate PIP, so their AP is lower to ensure that, in total, they pay exactly the same.
If we take the focus, it’s considerably cheaper for a manual. I would be against APs rising to make automatics cheaper. Often the increase in price for an automatic is less than the real increase anyway.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.