- This topic has 38 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 6 hours, 44 minutes ago by
.
- Topic
This survey is being used as evidence by Disability Advocates UK as impact and evidence collection for potential legal action against Motability for the upcoming policy changes
- Replies
My comment on the I Paper, was purely based on, why give them anything, when the I was as bad as other press in publishing hate and then only to be riddled at in the comments.
I don’t disagree with what you are saying and what you said is a helpful reminder. In my opinion the mainstream media are not a friend to the disabled or any disadvantaged group. I probably won’t be contacting the journalist. I already chose not to read newspapers or watch the news.
I did some research on how the mainstream media works, a few years ago, and realised they are not about telling the truth and finding out the truth. They are businesses. I still believe there are journalists who care about telling the truth, although perhaps I am being naive, but they are still subject to their editors who in turn are subject to their owners.
Being a business, the media’s main aim is to make a profit, their product is news and opinions, and their customers are their readers. Truth comes way down the pecking order.
They also know that fear, anger, and gossip sells and how the readers love a villian. And who is easier to make into a villian than by creating a narrative of those lazy shirkers defrauding the system and sitting at home getting free cars while you work your arse off to make a living.
What suprises me is how many disabled and Motability customers also buy into this narrative, going by the comments I read.
I guess I just got a bit of a shock cause I thought I was just sharing a form that people could either chose to sign or not sign. I didn’t expect some of the comments, but its a lesson on not taking things personally.
Your evidence was backed up by links from reputable sources, so there are no lessons you need to learn and the majority would rather you share information and if it can be backed up by yourself or by others (as it was) all well and good.
Another question to ask is would solicitors take on cases or would disabled advocates take on cases, if they didn’t think there was one?
@Des if your trying to drag it out of me then I did fill in the form after a little research😉@Joe Absolutely no need to apologise, nor to beat yourself up.
Sadly, this forum suffers from the same issues as all other online forums and social media, in that one or two people are unable to make a counter point without resorting to aggression or sarcasm. Although difficult at times, I’ve learned to just ignore those ‘contributors’ and let them have their moment.
You are a much valued contributor to this forum and make some excellent posts. Long may that continue.
Thanks for the support, its much appreciated.
I found Disability adovates on Facebook. This is what their page states
We are a passionate community dedicated to championing the rights, inclusion, and voices of disabled people across the UK.
Our mission is to raise awareness, challenge inequality, and provide support, guidance, and advocacy.
I also contacted them and asked who they are.
They replied with:
We are an advocacy service. 2 of the team worked for local authorities in their welfare rights service and we have a barrister who works pro bono with us. We have offered our services for 3 years total now.
Well according to people i’ve spoken to there appears to be more going on than we know. Theres a lot of movement going on especially MPs wading in and more. As for the legality of it well I imagine unfair terms and conditions a la CRA 2015 for one 500% increase in mileage fees.
The thing is it doesn’t matter what you, me or anyone else on here thinks there are obviously legal types who think there’s a case and if anyone wants more then as suggested go ask them. Last thing we need is those who think these changes are acceptable turning on those who don’t we’re supposed to be together in this, if anyone can’t control themselves or don’t like it then i’d suggest not reading the threads and all will be happy.
I do not think it’s beyond unreasonable to ask the company jacking prices up, offerings down why when they are sitting on nearly £6-7 billion in the bank and stocks with £1.3bn of that in cash especially when said company has a complete market monopoly and is solely funded from the taxpayer what they are doing, why they are doing it and to PROVE this isn’t the 4 banks making a cash grab
I’m surprised the likes of BMW and Mercedes aren’t behind this as it must be impacting their sales massively.
With their financial clout I’m sure they could easily force another u turn from this ridiculous labour government as well as Motability.
I do wonder at times if Andrew Miller is a plant as the scheme has definitely gone to pot since he became CEO.
I’m surprised the likes of BMW and Mercedes aren’t behind this as it must be impacting their sales massively. With their financial clout I’m sure they could easily force another u turn from this ridiculous labour government as well as Motability. I do wonder at times if Andrew Miller is a plant as the scheme has definitely gone to pot since he became CEO.
This is his CV. Taken from the Disability Advocates facebook page.
For those wondering about Andrew Miller CEO, here is a short bio on Andrew Miller CEO at Motability Operations.
He joined the Board at Channel 4 on 1 June 2020 as Non-Executive Director and Chair of Channel 4’s Audit Committee. His appointment runs until 30 Sept 2026.
Andrew is Chief Executive of Motability Operations plc. An accountant by training and a leader in digital transformation, Andrew has also held senior executive positions at a number of multinational consumer and media groups. These include Food Folk Group Holdings – owner of the McDonald’s licence for the Nordics Scandinavia – Guardian Media Group and Autotrader, taking the latter from a print magazine to a digital platform. Prior to this, Andrew held senior finance roles at Frito-Lay Europe, Procter & Gamble and Bass. He has also held Non-Executive Director roles and was Audit Chair at the AA plc and Ocean Outdoor Media plc.
Andrew is a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland and sits on the Advisory Board for Sarah Brown’s Theirworld charity.
No surprise that he’s a bean counter by trade. His CV, in terms of both previous job roles and specialisms, don’t seem to be anywhere near senior enough to put him in charge of an organisation the size of Motability Operations. He must interview well!
After all the Motability changes to save essential money, after the increase in VAT on AP’s and insurance, allegedly leading to forcing their members/customers to accept Drive Smart, for under 30s, new drivers and new contracts and largely overlooked, any of us who has a driver under 30 on the insurance. Also increase in millage charges but also in millage reduction, reducing driving to one hour without a break, and only six trips a day, to obtain cheaper insurance and lower millage cars.
They also have to differentiate between the leaser and the driver/’s, because they are going to possibly recall the leaser’s car due to the points accumulated by possibly several driver’s needed by the leaser.
Taking all this into account, it would be interesting to know how much money Motability has or will lose due to their Government led propaganda decision to remove so called Luxury makes and larger more disability suitable cars, from their list.
These cars almost always carried large AP’s paid by us, which covered the extra cost of the car at the start of the lease and let Motability get larger return resale values at the end of the lease, when sold. This was largely why Motability had large Reserves, which was suppose to be spent on securing suitable affordable cars for us, the disabled members/customers.
I shared my conversation with Motability with Disability advocates and their reply was that Motability is required to comply with standards set by the Financial Conduct Authority, including the Consumer Duty (PRIN 2A).
They also said they have contacted my MP.
For anyone wishing to still complain to their MP, here is a template
Dear [MP’s Name],
I am writing to raise serious concerns regarding recent and proposed changes to the Motability Scheme, which I believe may be in breach of the Equality Act 2010 and risk causing significant harm to disabled people.
The changes include:
* The introduction of telematics monitoring (via the DriveSmart app), which penalises drivers for travelling longer than one hour without stopping;
* Penalties for driving at night beyond certain times;
* A restriction within DriveSmart limiting users to a maximum of six journeys per day;
* A proposed reduction in annual mileage allowance from 60,000 miles to 30,000 miles (from July 2026);
* A substantial increase in excess mileage charges from approximately 5p to 25p per mile.
Taken together, these measures represent a significant and concerning shift in how disabled people are able to use their vehicles.
Firstly, they appear to constitute **indirect discrimination**, as they disproportionately impact disabled individuals who rely on their vehicles as a necessity rather than a choice. A limit of six journeys per day fails to reflect the reality of many disabled people’s lives, where multiple short trips may be required for medical needs, caring responsibilities, or daily living activities.
Secondly, the policies may amount to **discrimination arising from disability**, as they penalise behaviours that are directly linked to disability-related needs. For example, continuing to drive beyond one hour may be necessary to reach a safe stopping point, and making multiple journeys in a day may be unavoidable depending on individual circumstances.
There are also clear **safety risks**. On many A, B, and C class roads—particularly in rural areas—there are no safe or well-lit places to stop. Drivers may therefore be forced to choose between stopping in unsafe conditions (with risks from passing vehicles, animals, or unknown individuals) or continuing to drive and being penalised. Similarly, restricting journeys or discouraging travel at certain times may interfere with individuals’ ability to travel safely when it best suits their needs.
Furthermore, the use of rigid, automated enforcement through telematics systems demonstrates a failure to make **reasonable adjustments**, as required under the Equality Act. Disabled individuals have diverse and often complex needs, and a blanket “one-size-fits-all” approach—particularly one that limits journeys, duration, and timing—fails to accommodate those differences.
The proposed halving of mileage and the fivefold increase in excess mileage charges will also have a severe financial impact, particularly on those who rely solely on disability benefits. These changes risk undermining the fundamental purpose of the Motability Scheme, which is to promote independence and mobility for disabled people.
Given the seriousness of these concerns, I would ask that you:
1. Raise this matter with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions;
2. Seek confirmation as to whether a full Equality Impact Assessment has been undertaken;
3. Request that these measures, including the DriveSmart restrictions, are suspended pending proper review;
4. Consider the broader implications for disabled people both within your constituency and nationally.
This is not simply a policy issue—it is a matter of equality, safety, and basic fairness. The cumulative effect of these changes risks significantly restricting the independence of disabled people across the UK.
I would welcome your support in ensuring that these concerns are properly investigated and addressed.
I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Address / Postcode]
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.