- This topic has 236 replies, 58 voices, and was last updated 3 days, 18 hours ago by
.
- Topic
Current: MY24 Renault Austral Iconic FHD.
Ordered 5/2/26: Chery Tiggo 8 'Summit' ICEPrevious Motability cars:
2013 Ford Focus estate auto.
2016 Vauxhal Zafira 1.4T SE Auto.
2019 Ford Kuga Vignale 1.5 auto AWD. (Ext lease)
- Replies
An interesting fb post, posted across the usual Motability related fb groups by a Motability dealership sales manager who frequently has special offers on Motability scheme vehicles. This was posted today 31st March 26. Obviously details of this scheme are not known as yet, but it does suggest dealers may be starting to be pro-active in trying to ‘Hoover up’ disenfranchised or disillusioned former Motability scheme customers by designing some sort of scheme for such. Hopefully more dealerships will do likewwise for this potentially untapped market:
N.B I have no connection whatsoever to this dealership other than have posted up their frequent Motability Scheme offers in the usual thread.
@BigDave would you like to make the above into a thread all of its own,i like the idea and there could be more to add into this in the future,it would be a shame if this and future content got buried in this thread.@BigDave would you like to make the above into a thread all of its own,i like the idea and there could be more to add into this in the future,it would be a shame if this and future content got buried in this thread.
Can do, but would prefer to wait for fuller details to emerge from this and any other dealership offering similar before re-posting them, just in case when they do appear they are not as first promised!
Dave
I’ve received a reply from motability on the questions I sent:
I appreciate you taking the time to set out your additional questions. I understand why these points matter to you.
As I explained in my previous email, the changes apply to new vehicle orders placed on or after 1 July 2026. Existing leases are not changing right now. After reviewing the points you have raised, my position remains the same.
These changes have been introduced in response to UK Government tax changes and wider cost pressures. From 1 July 2026, those changes add around £300 million a year to the cost of delivering the Scheme. Our priority has been to protect the core all-inclusive package that customers rely on, including insurance, servicing, maintenance, breakdown cover and support, while keeping the Scheme sustainable for the long term.
You asked what savings are being made through the mileage changes. Mileage is one of the biggest cost drivers in the Scheme, and the revised allowance was introduced to better reflect typical customer usage overall and to help manage vehicle, maintenance and insurance costs. We know this will feel more difficult for some customers, especially where travel is essential or where public transport is limited.
While I note your comments about the overall customer figures, the mileage allowance was set using Scheme-wide usage data and was introduced to reflect how most customers use their vehicle overall, while helping to manage the long-term cost of the Scheme
On consultation, we have engaged with customers through surveys, interviews and focus groups. We have also engaged more than 100,000 customers over a period of months, although with a customer base of more than 890,000 we cannot contact everyone each time. I appreciate that you did not receive a survey, but that does not mean engagement did not take place.
In relation to CEO pay, the standard position is that our CEO’s pay is set by an independent committee and reflects the experience needed to run a large, complex organisation such as Motability Operations.
You also asked what we are doing to highlight hardship caused by the Government’s tax changes. We continue to engage regularly with Government, policymakers and other stakeholders about how the Scheme works, why it matters, and the impact of these changes on disabled people’s mobility and independence.
You also asked about DriveSmart. DriveSmart currently applies only to specific leases:
• those with a driver under 30
• those enrolled in DriveSmart following a Mid Lease Review from 3 March 2026
• new customers joining the Scheme for applications from 13 April 2026
If none of the above apply, DriveSmart would not be included in the lease. These are the current criteria, and while this may evolve in future, any changes would always be clearly communicated to customers in advance.
Not heard anyone having to undertake a Mid lease review ? Wonder if that means people who have to claim via their insurance or something.
On consultation, we have engaged with customers through surveys, interviews and focus groups. We have also engaged more than 100,000 customers over a period of months,
I have never been asked to take part in any customer focused reviews, regardless of the topic.
I’m sure Motability are aware of this forum and could have quite easily asked forum members thoughts or at the very least, asked @wmcforum if he minded conductucting such reviews for them.
I feel as always, these “think tank” led reviews, target specific leases / area’s.
Amen!
They seem to be hanging their hat on the fact that changes don’t come into effect until 1st July, as if to say that we shouldn’t be concerned about them!
I have filled in several surveys over the years, nothing mentioned about the above, always received one after contacting Mobility asking about how the call handler performed.
However, received a survey late afternoon asking about the changes, and how I feel about them. Main question the asked me if I am likely to leave the scheme.
Unfortunately I have suffered a brain injury and occasionally I get confused and often say the wrong thing.
Myself, and a few members on here did a survey last year. Pretty sure there was either a thread, or it was discussed in a thread on here
If there has indeed been any such survey/consultation
I have yet to see any detail/data from it
imo this whole episode comes across as being about as well run and above board as the so called Timms review
Rushed,blinkered
Already determined
Smoke n Mirrors
But we are dealing with .Gov/Bankers so I am not to surprised about anything tbh
Seems like motability themselves don’t know what is happening 100% with their own scheme as a full list of responses from them on the FB group says drive smart will be forced on everyone within 3 years, plus no smart phone= forced full black box.
Where as on here, Its stated if it’s not part of your agreement it’s not going to be included but may change in the future.
While many people on here seem blindly confident in the system and their driving 100% of the time for 3 years straight!
I think many more of us would likely be part of a huge exodus from the scheme.
After over 30 years of amazing support from motability, it’s a very sad thought.
Seems like motability themselves don’t know what is happening 100% with their own scheme as a full list of responses from them on the FB group says drive smart will be forced on everyone within 3 years, plus no smart phone= forced full black box.
In 20mph Wales, they can stick it where the sun don’t shine!
Seems like motability themselves don’t know what is happening 100% with their own scheme as a full list of responses from them on the FB group says drive smart will be forced on everyone within 3 years, plus no smart phone= forced full black box.
In 20mph Wales, they can stick it where the sun don’t shine!
Best include Cornwall in that too, most towns now have 20 mph limits. It’s a joke, you’ll get many now going slower but still have the idiots charging up and down the same roads at the same speeds that were nowhere near 30 then.
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
I for one will be leaving if they introduce drive smart. Im not having my driving constantly monitored, like I’m some kind of misbehaving child who can’t be trusted. Its bad enough that the car I drive already rates my driving after every journey. Although I tend to get in the 80s to 90s for safety most of the time.
As for the CEO’s and staff’s pay and perks, to me it demonstrates the corrupt society we live in. In my opinion its obscene that they pay those kind of sums when their major income is from disabled customers benefits, especially when cutbacks are being forced upon those customers, that will severely effect many of their lives.
But it doesn’t suprise me when I read that for many of the major charities, 90-98% of the donations they receive go to directors pay.
I would send a reply to speak my mind, but I feel what’s the point. All I would get back is the usual well rehearsed trite. I may as well just be talking to a machine.
I’ve been looking and I could get a decent Mondeo or Volvo or something similar for a couple of grand and probably be better off financially. Yes I may have the stress of it potentially breaking down, but I’d rather have the stress of that then the stress of constantly having to worry about driving pefectly, with the knowledge that any tiny mistake could result in my losing the car.
Hhhmmm stressful reading and understandably so for new comers or new leases ahead.
Ive only recently (5/6 months) had my MG hs maybe it has a black box I don’t know or care, it do monitor driving with beeps and whatever else is going on with it, I drive to my condition and time limits always have always will.
If it don’t suit others then that’s that, I mean we can’t please everyone can we, not even the over sensitive car controls..
Strange times we live in these days, on and off the scheme, where has it all gone wrong, or can someone point out where it’s going right in any subject these days, for anyone.
Seems like soon as there’s any upset to disabled, lgbqt, different race (just example’s possibly more) it becomes huge problems..
Its difficult for everyone these days from all walks of life, even if you’re just trying to understand modern day life..
Try to enjoy things that make you feel happy, relaxed and at peace, sometimes..
This will be my response and next questions to the responses I received from Motability.
In the letter Andrew Miller wrote that was published on the motability website he stated that the adding of VAT on leases and IPT would add £1100 to the average new lease. You stated these measures will add £300 million in costs to motability.
However if £300 million is divided by 800000 (minus the 60000 who lease WAV vehicles) then the extra cost per customer, due to the added VAT and IPT, would work out as £375 per customer.
Where are the extra £825 per lease figures coming from that don’t correlate with the claimed £300 million cost?
In the next year, Motability will be making an extra £150 million per year because of the increases in PIP. Will this increase be factored in, in the claimed extra costs to Motability because of the changes?
If in the future the Government decides to scrap the mandate adding VAT to advance payments and IPT, will Motability scrap these new imposed changes to the lease agreements?
You mentioned that over 100000 customers were surveyed before the changes were proposed. This number represents approximately 11.63% of the total of motability customers.
How is the opinions of less than 12% of customers a fair reflection on the overall needs of the customers?
You mention that an independent board decided on the CEOs pay.
Who is this board and what safeguards are in place to ensure the board is genuinly independent?
What duties does the CEO perform that justify a salery that is 436% higher than the Prime Minister of the UK earns?
What evidence of improvements to the motability scheme are there that can justify a pay increase for the CEO of 23.5% from 2024 to 2025?
I received another response from motability
I have reviewed the additional questions you have raised. I understand why you want more detail, particularly where these changes affect something as important as your mobility and independence.
As set out in my previous correspondence, the changes apply to new vehicle orders placed on or after 1 July 2026. Existing leases are not changing right now.
You asked about the figures referenced in Andrew Miller’s published letter, including the estimate of around £300 million a year in additional Scheme costs and the statement that, without changes, lease costs could increase by around £1,100 on average over three years.
These figures relate to the overall additional cost of delivering the Scheme and the average impact across renewing leases. They are not intended to be a simple per-customer division of the full Scheme population. The £300 million per year figure reflects the estimated increase in Scheme costs arising from the Government’s tax changes and associated pressures on renewing leases. The £1,100 figure is an average estimate of the cost impact over a three-year lease if no package changes had been made. We have therefore changed parts of the lease package to offset much of that impact and limit the average increase to around £400 over three years.
You also asked about increases to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and whether this changes our position. In relation to increases in the mobility allowance over the course of a lease, these are factored into the pricing of the agreement when the lease is taken out. This means that any increases to the mobility component during a three-year lease are already reflected in the lease pricing for a vehicle on the Scheme, and do not change our position on the changes already announced.
In relation to whether these changes would be reversed if Government tax policy changed in future, we keep the Scheme under review on an ongoing basis. However, I cannot speculate on future Government decisions or any future Scheme decisions beyond the changes already announced.
You asked about customer engagement and whether hearing from more than 100,000 customers is a fair reflection of customer need. We have engaged with customers through surveys, interviews and focus groups over a period of months to understand how the Scheme package can evolve in response to cost and tax changes. With a customer base of more than 890,000, we cannot contact every customer each time, but the engagement was intended to gather a broad range of views and perspectives. I appreciate that you were not contacted directly and that this is a point of frustration for you.
In relation to CEO pay, as previously outlined, CEO’s pay is set by an independent committee and reflects the experience needed to run a large, complex organisation such as Motability Operations. I am not able to provide further commentary on individual remuneration decisions, the committee’s internal processes, or comparative personal salary assessments.
You also asked what duties justify that level of pay and what evidence supports the increase you referenced. I appreciate you have strong views on this topic. However, my role is to respond to the Scheme changes and how they apply in practice for customers. I am therefore not able to add anything further beyond the position set out above.
For the reasons already explained in my earlier responses, our position remains unchanged. We have already provided our final response on this matter. We may not respond to any further correspondence about it.
I received another response from motability I have reviewed the additional questions you have raised. I understand why you want more detail, particularly where these changes affect something as important as your mobility and independence. As set out in my previous correspondence, the changes apply to new vehicle orders placed on or after 1 July 2026. Existing leases are not changing right now. You asked about the figures referenced in Andrew Miller’s published letter, including the estimate of around £300 million a year in additional Scheme costs and the statement that, without changes, lease costs could increase by around £1,100 on average over three years. These figures relate to the overall additional cost of delivering the Scheme and the average impact across renewing leases. They are not intended to be a simple per-customer division of the full Scheme population. The £300 million per year figure reflects the estimated increase in Scheme costs arising from the Government’s tax changes and associated pressures on renewing leases. The £1,100 figure is an average estimate of the cost impact over a three-year lease if no package changes had been made. We have therefore changed parts of the lease package to offset much of that impact and limit the average increase to around £400 over three years. You also asked about increases to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and whether this changes our position. In relation to increases in the mobility allowance over the course of a lease, these are factored into the pricing of the agreement when the lease is taken out. This means that any increases to the mobility component during a three-year lease are already reflected in the lease pricing for a vehicle on the Scheme, and do not change our position on the changes already announced. In relation to whether these changes would be reversed if Government tax policy changed in future, we keep the Scheme under review on an ongoing basis. However, I cannot speculate on future Government decisions or any future Scheme decisions beyond the changes already announced. You asked about customer engagement and whether hearing from more than 100,000 customers is a fair reflection of customer need. We have engaged with customers through surveys, interviews and focus groups over a period of months to understand how the Scheme package can evolve in response to cost and tax changes. With a customer base of more than 890,000, we cannot contact every customer each time, but the engagement was intended to gather a broad range of views and perspectives. I appreciate that you were not contacted directly and that this is a point of frustration for you. In relation to CEO pay, as previously outlined, CEO’s pay is set by an independent committee and reflects the experience needed to run a large, complex organisation such as Motability Operations. I am not able to provide further commentary on individual remuneration decisions, the committee’s internal processes, or comparative personal salary assessments. You also asked what duties justify that level of pay and what evidence supports the increase you referenced. I appreciate you have strong views on this topic. However, my role is to respond to the Scheme changes and how they apply in practice for customers. I am therefore not able to add anything further beyond the position set out above. For the reasons already explained in my earlier responses, our position remains unchanged. We have already provided our final response on this matter. We may not respond to any further correspondence about it.
Basically @Joe, bugger off and stop asking questions as we are not giving you any more answers.
‘existing leases or not changing RIGHT NOW’.
I interpreted that as we are all getting that stupid phone thingy sooner or later whether we like it or not.
Well lets all not act surprised
We are after all dealing with politicians and Bankers ( what a double act that is to contend with )
When push comes to shove imo and in true fashion
Bankers ( think I spelt that right ) and .Gov will always continue to thrown the weakest and most vulnerable under the bus if/when its to protect their own fat salary’s
Soon as Im able to leave this dying uncaring scheme
I will
Re the posted about above petition to the government, as it passed 10k signatories, the Government yesterday (13th April 2026) issued its response:
Weblink to petition and Government response: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/752400
My take on the governments response to the petition;
“The Government and Motability have worked in partnership to develop reforms” – The government now seems to be passing some of the blame on to Motability.
“fairness to the taxpayer, saving over £1 billion by financial year 2030/31” – Or, put another way, adding £1 billion of costs to Motability customers.
“These reforms will not affect eligibility for the Motability Scheme or disability benefits”. – True, but the forthcoming Timms review most likely will.
“These changes will only apply to customers taking out new leases with Motability and will not apply to current leases” – This line, which is also being used by Motability in response to every challenge of the changes, is seriously irritating me. It implies that only new customers are affected. EVERY Motability customer will be renewing a lease over the next few years and then ALL of these adverse changes will apply to them. This continually repeated line is disingenuous.
“Motability has also confirmed it will continue to offer a broad range of vehicles available without an Advance Payment, ensuring that people can access vehicles suited to their needs, whether that’s a larger vehicle or extra boot space to carry wheelchairs, using only their disability benefit.” – The biggest lie of all. I’d be very interested to know which genuinely large vehicles (as opposed to what Motability term ‘large’) remain on the scheme, especially if you exclude EVs which are only suitable for those who can charge at home. Many disabled people need cars with higher seating positions (SUVs) with automatic transmission and large boots for wheelchairs. As we know, the ‘choice’ of these vehicles is dreadful and I’m not aware of any that fit the bill that are zero AP.
“Motability recognises that some customers may need to drive more miles for a variety of reasons. They will be introducing an exceptions process for very limited situations” – Given that governments of all colours rightly say that disabled people should be encouraged to remain in work whenever possible, will commuting count as one of the “very limited situations”? I suspect not, but it should be.
My take on the governments response to the petition;
“The Government and Motability have worked in partnership to develop reforms” – The government now seems to be passing some of the blame on to Motability.
“fairness to the taxpayer, saving over £1 billion by financial year 2030/31” – Or, put another way, adding £1 billion of costs to Motability customers.
“These reforms will not affect eligibility for the Motability Scheme or disability benefits”. – True, but the forthcoming Timms review most likely will.
“These changes will only apply to customers taking out new leases with Motability and will not apply to current leases” – This line, which is also being used by Motability in response to every challenge of the changes, is seriously irritating me. It implies that only new customers are affected. EVERY Motability customer will be renewing a lease over the next few years and then ALL of these adverse changes will apply to them. This continually repeated line is disingenuous.
“Motability has also confirmed it will continue to offer a broad range of vehicles available without an Advance Payment, ensuring that people can access vehicles suited to their needs, whether that’s a larger vehicle or extra boot space to carry wheelchairs, using only their disability benefit.” – The biggest lie of all. I’d be very interested to know which genuinely large vehicles (as opposed to what Motability term ‘large’) remain on the scheme, especially if you exclude EVs which are only suitable for those who can charge at home. Many disabled people need cars with higher seating positions (SUVs) with automatic transmission and large boots for wheelchairs. As we know, the ‘choice’ of these vehicles is dreadful and I’m not aware of any that fit the bill that are zero AP. “
Motability recognises that some customers may need to drive more miles for a variety of reasons. They will be introducing an exceptions process for very limited situations” – Given that governments of all colours rightly say that disabled people should be encouraged to remain in work whenever possible, will commuting count as one of the “very limited situations”? I suspect not, but it should be.
But did you honestly expect anything other than the response from the Government @glos_guy
On the last point, re extra mileage allowance ‘exceptions process for very limited situations’ it will probably be the ‘key’ for Motability to extend the tracker system even wider – i.e. to those claiming the extra milage exception.
They will no doubt say they cannot have customers claiming it is commuting /work milage, but disappearing off to the coast etc instead!
But did you honestly expect anything other than the response from the Government @glos_guy!
Well it’s probably a more fulsome response than I might have expected @BigDave but still full of the utter BS that politicians spout! 😂
It’s also the typical response from big organisations who justify unpopular changes as being “in response to customer feedback” 🤔
I have just done this “Large” vehicle check on Motability…..i selected Large SUV and Nil advance payment
Answer….No cars found.
I had to go all the way upto £1500 Advance payment (which will have 20% VAT added in July) and the system came up with 1 vehicle the Jaecoo 7..you will need deep pockets to fuel that at current fuel prices.
N.B I have no connection whatsoever to this dealership other than have posted up their frequent Motability Scheme offers in the usual thread.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.