- This topic has 154 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by
.
- Topic
Daily Mail article bashing Motability:
- Replies
People in the Mail comments section saying that they know people with Porsche and Range Rover vehicles “free” from the govt and there’s “nothing wrong with them.” Then these posts are upvoted despite being lies. Nobody gets Porsche and Range Rover vehicles on Motability and I’m sick of seeing comments making out that everyone is perfectly able to work blah blah blah. Also that blue badges are given out like sweets. It raises my blood pressure reading this cr@p!
Best not to read them. Sadly, this time it’s not restricted to the Daily Mail. Several other papers are running anti-Motability articles. Yesterday alone both the Telegraph and the Sun newspapers had a go as well. It was also mentioned on the Sky News newspaper review last night. The “£50k BMWs” line is getting lots of coverage. I can see the i4 being removed from the scheme soon.
Liz Kendall is due to announce the green paper at 12.30pm today, so we will at last have some meat on the bone about what is being proposed. The tightening of eligibility criteria for PIP looks like a given which, in itself, will reduce the numbers entitled to join Motability, but it will be interesting to see if some of the higher end cars are removed, especially as they are all EVs which manufacturers and dealers are pushing.
I’d like to think that Motability will fight back and explain just how much it costs to join the scheme, but I guess they might be shooting themselves in the foot by doing that, as it never ceases to amaze me how many customers consider the cost to be just the AP and don’t factor in the cost of the sacrificed benefits.
The problem is that when you have a system that involves getting something for what is perceived as ‘free’ you will get people who are happy to exploit it.
Current car: MG HS Exclusive in nice shiny black. 🙂
And this country seems to want to race to the bottom. People often seem to overlook that they are dealing with the most vulnerable in society.
Skoda Enyaq Race Blue
especially as they are all EVs which manufacturers and dealers are pushing. I’d like to think that Motability will fight back and explain just how much it costs to join the scheme, but I guess they might be shooting themselves in the foot by doing that, as it never ceases to amaze me how many customers consider the cost to be just the AP and don’t factor in the cost of the sacrificed benefits.
Not forgetting the government themselves because if it wasn’t for Motability push in EV’s the sales figures they keep bragging about being so good in the UK would paint a very different story so that will be a bullet they will have to dig out of their foot.
And this country seems to want to race to the bottom. People often seem to overlook that they are dealing with the most vulnerable in society.
I’ve been saying it for decades that the aspirations of this country is one day I will own my own pushbike.
Hey GG,
agreed.
The Daily Mail is historically an anti Labour Party newspaper, much the same as the Guardian is very clearly a Labour Party supporting newspaper, and , frankly, we should all take anything that either newspaper expresses on ‘politics’, with a shovel full of salt!
We must all remember that the Labour Government has been spinning ( heavily) on benefit cuts, some of which may very well impact on Motability, and they seem to be launching a war on pensioners and benefit recipients.
It must be expected therefore, that ‘Opposition’ supporting Newspapers will attack, and in this instance they are diverting attention from pensioners to potentially undeserving benefit recipients!
I don’t support the attack on Motability, but I can understand why they are doing it!
Regards,
I’d be quite happy to be given a once-every-3 yr tax discount that can be used to lease a vehicle from any leasing company. It would also make it clearer to the general public that we do pay for these leases. It would also mean that there would be competition, rather than Motability having a monopoly.
There’ll still be people not happy that we get a tax discount, but it’s better sounding than a totally free car that many think we get.
What is weird is that rich or poor are on DLA or Pip and parents disabled children so for instance the royal family could claim it so why the attacks on disabled should be pointed out to the attackers.
I’d be quite happy to be given a once-every-3 yr tax discount that can be used to lease a vehicle from any leasing company. It would also make it clearer to the general public that we do pay for these leases. It would also mean that there would be competition, rather than Motability having a monopoly. There’ll still be people not happy that we get a tax discount, but it’s better sounding than a totally free car that many think we get.
Fully understand your reasoning, but there would need to be a legal commitment from Government, to the leasing company’s ’lenders’ that some or all of each individual’s DLA will be guaranteed to be paid to the lender, which the Government may not want or , indeed, be able to provide?
This is the system used by Motability (although independent of Government ,Motability is a Government initiative) . and the DWP and because there is a guarantee of payment, the lenders /Motability, do not need to carry out income assessments , Credit Searches/ Checks the results of which could jeopardise perhaps many an applicant’s ability to lease, and therefore will exclude them from the scheme?
It should be remembered that many disabled people , due to lowish incomes, have fallen into financial difficulties and now have questionable credit ratings , and not necessarily through any fault of theirs ?
Even with it’s faults. Motability is still a fabulous scheme giving access to some fabulous cars ,to many people who otherwise would be excluded!
Long May it survive!
Listened to the entire DWP Benefits speech by Liz Kendall today including the reply by Helen Whatley and all the questions an answers from members,across the house.
And there was only one mention of “high end vehicles” and that was slipped in,in her reply by the Tory Shadow DWP minister,Helen Whatley.
Listened to the entire DWP Benefits speech by Liz Kendall today and there was only one mention of “high end vehicles” and that was slipped in,in her reply by the Tory Shadow DWP minister,Helen Whatley.
I thought that was cheap and if I was LK I would have jumped on it. Thought she missed a trick there.
well at least theres a couple of common sense ideas there particularly about those with cronic conditions that arent going to improve effectively being given lifetime awards, no reveiws in the future. likewise some enhancements for them.
at least they are aiming for more face to face assessments rather than the phone assessments which in my view are loaded against the claimant.
not as bad as i thought it would be.
Listened to the entire DWP Benefits speech by Liz Kendall today including the reply by Helen Whatley and all the questions an answers from members,across the house. And there was only one mention of “high end vehicles” and that was slipped in,in her reply by the Tory Shadow DWP minister,Helen Whatley.
Typical, cheap and underhanded pot kettle response from an oppositon party!
As for the government, they have not only created anxiety amongs’t claimants but, also hatred and divide, which is inexusable.
It does not matter who is in government your are going to get shafted, we could not be bothered to vote in the last election.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally say the wrong thing.
I’ve only skimmed it as I’m travelling, but am I correct in thinking that there is nothing in the review that will impact Motability? I couldn’t see any reference to the mobility aspect of PIP, just daily living.
I couldn’t see any reference to the mobility aspect of PIP, just daily living.
Correct.
Great breakdown of this on B&W. It really isn’t good. 😵💫
https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/dwp-launches-entirely-bogus-green-paper-consultation
I couldn’t see any reference to the mobility aspect of PIP, just daily living.
Correct.
Thanks. That’s good. I wonder if the Daily Mail, Sun, Telegraph and others will go for a ‘round 2’, saying that there was an opportunity missed to restrict who is eligible for the scheme? I can’t see them all just dropping it, but I hope I’m wrong. I will be fascinated to see if the BMW i4 is still on the scheme in Q2, as that seems to be the car that several of them have fixated on.
GBC has new video out….is he a DM Spad.
He’s a dick going down the rabbit hole, with no intention of searching facts, as facts don’t fit the narrative of his video’s!
I couldn’t see any reference to the mobility aspect of PIP, just daily living.
Correct.
Thanks. That’s good. I wonder if the Daily Mail, Sun, Telegraph and others will go for a ‘round 2’, saying that there was an opportunity missed to restrict who is eligible for the scheme? I can’t see them all just dropping it, but I hope I’m wrong. I will be fascinated to see if the BMW i4 is still on the scheme in Q2, as that seems to be the car that several of them have fixated on.
Well put @Glos Guy,
It wouldn’t surprise me if the government didn’t have an ulterior motive on this.
I hope I am wrong, but until ‘Rachel from Accounts’ does her worst later this month, changes could still happen via the back door.
With the media (and social media) seemingly venting their tirade against the Motability Scheme of late, I am left wondering as to whether the government is simply letting the media do its bidding on this, particularly in the court of public opinion.
What better then than to tinker with the current structural workings of Motability itself in the forthcoming Spring Statement. Such as reducing or even removing the block VAT exemption. Outside of Motability, I suppose the VED exemption could also be up for grabs.
Using levers such as these, the government can claim it isn’t cutting the welfare payments that keep disabled people mobile. Whilst at the same time, also curbing that ‘runaway’ Motability Scheme by claiming they are leveling up the scheme with other leasing companies non-disabled people use (public opinion/perception etc).
The DWP can say ‘ah guv, not us, we didn’t cut it’ and blame the Treasury. The Treasury can dress it up with whatever spin they want to put on it (using public perception of disabled people with ‘free’ (sic) BMW i4’s etc).
They are simply taking back more money via the rear door. (Give in one hand and take back in the other – how many times have we seen this happen over the years)?
Doing such as this curbs Motability a bit, without in effect wiping out the motor industry. The government in effect lets Motability take he hit for it and the public think the Government are good eggs for stopping disabled people getting ‘free’ (sic) BMW i4’s.
Plus it raises income for the Treasury,
A win-win all round for the Government.
And a lose-lose for disabled people!
As I said, I hope I am wrong, but……………..
Good points @BigDave The conundrum that the government will have is that the “high end luxury cars” that the media are fixated on are EVs. As Motability is the biggest buyer of EVs in the country at present, probably by some margin, any curbing of choice will have an adverse impact on the government’s ability to achieve the ZEV targets which, whilst unachievable, they still seem fixated on!
Good points @BigDave The conundrum that the government will have is that the “high end luxury cars” that the media are fixated on are EVs. As Motability is the biggest buyer of EVs in the country at present, probably by some margin, any curbing of choice will have an adverse impact on the government’s ability to achieve the ZEV targets which, whilst unachievable, they still seem fixated on!
Indeed GG.
However, in reality how may top end EV’s do Motability actually lease out? Either as a percentage of their total fleet or actual number, it can’t be that high vs more ‘run of the mill’ vehicles, including EV’s.
Motability could jettison top end EV’s (a la 2011) without too much damage to themselves. Infact they might even get a smidgen of positive acknowledgement for doing so.
Customers who want a high end EV would probably either lease a slightly lesser EV on the scheme (which helps with the PR narrative) or even privately lease/buy one – either way, it’s roughly neutral overall.
Yes, I totally agree about choice, but knowing how Motability capitulated in 2011, nothing would surprise me.
As I feared, the attacks on Motability continue. This from todays Telegraph;
Benefits claimants can still get subsidised BMWs despite welfare cuts
Certain people eligible for disability payments can continue to access the controversial Motability scheme.Benefits claimants can still apply for subsidised top-of-the-range BMWs worth more than £50,000 despite the Government’s welfare cuts.
The controversial Motability scheme, which was handed a record £2.8 billion of taxpayer cash last year to fund new cars for people on mobility benefits, will not be cut back in Labour’s welfare reforms.
The leasing scheme allows successful claimants to exchange part of their disability payments for brand new cars – including BMWs and Ford Mustangs that would otherwise cost as much as £54,000 – if they also pay a down payment.
It has been branded out of control by critics who fear the broad range of conditions under which recipients may qualify – such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism and anxiety – leaves it vulnerable to exploitation. Applicants must prove that such conditions affect their mobility to be eligible for Motability.
A series of benefit fraud cases have seen claimants exaggerate illnesses to acquire Motability cars, including a mother who exaggerated her arthritis to obtain seven cars on the scheme.
The Government’s changes to personal independence payments (PIP) – the benefit required to qualify for Motability – are only changing its “daily living” component.
It means anyone who receives the enhanced level of “mobility” PIP, worth £3,939 annually, can continue to exchange it for a Motability car worth up to 12 times as much.
The most expensive cars available on the scheme retail for up to £54,000 and include the BMW i4, BMW iX1 SUV and Ford Mustang Mach-E. Other options include a £36,000 Abarth 600e, £33,000 Audi Q3 and £32,000 Mercedes A-class.
These high-end cars require recipients to pay a down payment of at least £2,999 but the total cost still comes in at a fraction of what ordinary members of the public would pay.
On TikTok, claimants boast of “driving in style” thanks to the taxpayer-funded car scheme as they pick up cars including a £37,000 Skoda Karoq, £30,000 Nissan Qashqai and £29,000 Kia Sportage.
One says, “thank you Government” in the video, adding: “Me and the girls will be driving in style.”
Car dealerships are now advertising specifically to benefits claimants on the platform, showing off the features of the £46,000 Audi Q4 e-tron, £36,000 Mercedes A-class and £24,000 Audi A1 that can be acquired on the scheme.
The soaring popularity of Motability has seen the number of users balloon from 635,000 in 2020 to a record 815,000 last year.
Over the same period, the scheme’s income from benefits payments – paid for by the taxpayer – has increased by £800 million, rising by 41 per cent from £1.99 billion to £2.81 billion.
Motability was first designed in the 1970s for those with physical disabilities but welfare recipients can now get onto the scheme with conditions like ADHD, autism and anxiety if these conditions affect their mobility.
Since 2016, the number of those eligible with ADHD has increased by 1,400 per cent, up from 2,348 people to 35,115.
Andrew Miller, its chief executive, received £748,000 in total remuneration last year.
According to an analysis by the TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA), the number of those eligible who have autism has also increased by 703 per cent, from 3,509 to 28,225.
John O’Connell, the TPA’s chief executive, said it was “beyond doubt that honest taxpayers are being taken for a ride by those who have worked out how to game the system”.
On Wednesday, Sir Stephen Timms, the social security minister, said Labour’s welfare reforms would not tighten PIP to stop payments to people with conditions like anxiety.
“No,” he told Times Radio. “It depends what the effect of the condition is on people’s well-being, and the indicators are all published and set out. So if you have difficulties doing certain things, then you get points on the PIP assessment.”
However, there is evidence that the assessment can be exploited by benefits fraudsters aiming to take advantage of the scheme.
These include mother of four Linda Hoey, who faked her way to seven Motability cars between 2001 and 2015 by claiming arthritis left her barely able to walk.
She was given an 18-month suspended sentence in 2017 after photographs were uncovered showing her scuba diving on holiday in the Maldives.
Carer Colette Udall took £21,000 in handouts – including a Motability car – by claiming she could not get out of bed unaided, only to be filmed taking out the bins at the care home where she worked. She was handed a community order in 2019 and told to pay it all back at Minshull Street Crown Court.
In 2021, it emerged that Aaron Hooper, a supposedly wheelchair-bound man from Axminster, Somerset, had appeared in a video on Instagram pulling his Motability car through a car park on a rope. His mother Ann, who claimed the benefits on his behalf, was jailed for nine months at Exeter Crown Court in September 2021.
Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: “The Motability scheme is a textbook example of a well-intentioned idea that has got way out of hand. It is symptomatic of the country’s spiralling welfare costs which Labour are failing to grasp.
“This week the Government had an opportunity to step up on welfare, but they failed. Their announcement fell short on savings but has left disabled people terrified.
“What Britain needs is a government which is both willing and able to make fundamental reforms to welfare. Sadly, we have the opposite.”
Richard Tice, the deputy leader of Reform UK, vowed that his party would “cut the waste” if it formed the next government.
“This is yet another example where successive Tory and Labour governments have failed to get a grip on the misuse of public funds, squandering exorbitant amounts with very few checks and balances,” he told The Telegraph.
“Only Reform will cut the waste, crack down on fraud and reinvest in Britain.”
‘No additional cost to the taxpayer’
A spokesman for Motability Operations said the DWP was solely responsible for determining who received disability benefits.“To use the Motability scheme, someone must receive one of a number of Government-funded higher rate mobility benefits which are defined in legislation,” the spokesman said.
“The Motability scheme gives 815,000 disabled people the freedom to get to work, school, and medical appointments – helping them live independently and play an active role in society. The scheme isn’t just life-changing for individuals – it also boosts the UK economy.”
A DWP spokesman said: “The Motability scheme helps people with significant mobility issues participate in society. People claiming benefits must sacrifice some of their existing payments to lease a car, so this comes at no additional cost to the taxpayer.
“But we are determined to stamp out benefit fraud in all its forms with our crackdown due to save the taxpayer £1.5 billion over the next five years, part of wider plans that will save £8.6 billion by 2030.
“This comes alongside our plans for the largest welfare reforms in a generation – backed by a £1 billion investment – to support those who can work to do so while protecting those who cannot, putting welfare on a fairer, more sustainable footing, to unlock growth as part of the Plan for Change.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.