Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Disappointment & Problems due to rule changes with new car

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    2,293
    I would just like to warn you to be careful how you phrase things, I'm sure you don't mean to write it how it comes across but the sentence..
    I do agree it's not 'free' as such-costs will naturally come into play. Advanced payments etc.
    ...makes out that the only expense for us is an Advance Payment, please don't overlook the £245 per month that we also pay out - from the benefit given to us to ease the mobility problems we have.

    Your other paragraph regarding what non-Motability car owners have to endure is not comparable, as most of these people also don't suffer from the negative impact a disability has on you and your life.

    I believe Peugeot do a similar scheme as Motability called 'Just Add Fuel', this is open everyone and not just those with certain disability benefits. So if you want the experience of 'worry free motoring' you don't need a disability to try it out.


    I'm sorry if the above is harsh, but having had only 3.5hrs sleep last night, and managed a full day at work on top, I'm utterly exhausted (and in never ending pain) to read your response amazed me, especially if that is your attitude when you work for a company helping people with disabilities.
    Motability Car History
    05/09-05/12; Nissan Qashqai 1.5 Diesel Tekna; 36,500 miles; avg 41.1mpg
    06/12-07/15; Ford C-Max 2.0 Diesel Titanium Powershift; 35,400 miles; avg 37.8mpg
    07/15-09/17; Skoda Octavia 1.6 Diesel SE-L DSG; 28,200miles; avg 43.9mpg
    09/17-Present; VW Touran 1.4 Petrol SEL DSG; 11,600miles; avg 35.9mpg (28.6 - 43.9mpg)

    Click here to send me an email with any private Motoring questions you may have. Replies usually within 48hrs

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul View Post
    I
    I'm sorry if the above is harsh, but having had only 3.5hrs sleep last night, and managed a full day at work on top, I'm utterly exhausted (and in never ending pain) to read your response amazed me, especially if that is your attitude when you work for a company helping people with disabilities.
    Im afraid you are being a touch defensive and are taking offense where none is due. Ive was actually defending the scheme and have been rather supportive of it (which makes perfect sense considering I work for it). I was simply responding to someone else who made a point about the cost element of it-ie, it not being free. My point being that they are correct, it isn't `free`, but that its the elements of it being `free at the point of need` which is the important and useful aspect, and indeed one of the key selling points. The phrase `worry free motoring` isn't my phrase. Its Motabilities. I was simply giving my interpretation of what that actually means.
    Last edited by Elephant123; 04-25-2014 at 11:10 PM.

  3. #33
    I think both Paul and Elephant123 raise important points, and I'm sure that the written word in this textual only forum is letting us down to some extent, as it's impossible to communicate every nuance of what is being said.


    Motability is certainly not "free" - at the very least you give up some, or, more commonly, all of your Mobility component. In return, you get a package that is more generous over costs than any retail offering I'm aware of. The nearest retail offering is likely to be Peugeot "Just Add Fuel" - but that has a bunch of conditions that don't apply to Motability - minimum of two years full UK licence, minimum of two years No Claims Discount that you can apply to the insurance, worn parts are at the customer's expense (so the driver has to pay for tyres, brakes etc.), a maximum age of 75 and minimum age of as high as 30 for some models. It's also subject to financial status, as it involves a regulated consumer credit agreement

    There's certainly no retail offering that will lease a new car to a 16 year old (the lowest age that someone with a Mobility component can drive a car) with insurance included for around £260 per month. In not aware of any way a driver under 18 would get insured with a £75 excess other than Motability. Most insurers impose a mandatory excess of the order of £500 on drivers in this age bracket, if they will cover them at all.


    However, there have to be some limits to keep the costs affordable and to maintain public respect for the scheme by ensuring that Motability vehicles are for the purposes of the disabled person. These issues led to the controversial rule changes.

    There are some who have been hard hit by the changes - they've come to rely on Motability to be mobile, then, through no fault of their own, they cannot get another agreement that suits their specific needs. I still don't understand why RSA Motability would not accept a copy of the shambolic's carer's French documentation accompanied by a translation from a translator recognised by the English courts at shambolic's expense. Such a translation could be relied on in court by RSA Motability if necessary, so I can't see why it is not acceptable.

    It's very unlikely that the French authorities would issue an official document in English. Would DVLA issue an official letter in Hungarian just because some Hungarian insurance company refused to accept an English version accompanied by a translation into Hungarian from a recognised translator?

    If you leave someone without a reasonable way ahead, of course they will be upset.


    On the other hand, there were undoubtedly those who abused the scheme. Motability was never intended to provide cars for disabled people to gift to a friend or relative who lives elsewhere and uses it for their own purposes wholly unconnected with the disabled person for most of the time.


    As Elephant123 says, there are few areas more focused on the letter of the rules than insurance, not least because of the large sums potentially at stake. Young drivers wondering why they're being quoted thousands of pounds to insure an old heap third party only often don't think why. If they made a mistake driving stupidly on the motorway that causes a car transporter full of new Ferraris to swerve and crash through the parapet of a flyover, catching fire and closing the M25 for eight hours, their insurance company might have to pay out millions of pounds.



    Motability is not free, but it does cushion those eligible for the scheme who would face the greatest financial hurdles to motoring from the costs, whilst those who decide to stay outside the scheme for whatever reason (including being able to make their own cheaper arrangements) can take Mobility component payments instead.

    Motability gives flexibility that you are unlikely to find elsewhere. If you sign a commercial three year contract hire agreement and your financial or mobility circumstances changed, it's unlikely you could walk away without a hefty termination fee. With Motability, if your financial or mobility circumstances change and you have to terminate an agreement early, you may well get a proportion of your advance payment refunded.


    Much as we might wish otherwise, Motability can never be all things to all eligible people. There are going to be those whose driving or insurance records are too poor to be allowed on the scheme insurance, no matter how deserving their case is. There are going to be those who do not treat their vehicle or the scheme rules with respect, causing financial and/or reputational damage to the scheme.

    However, it is wrong to look on Motability clients as anything other than paying customers.

    Ultimately, respect must be shown both ways. Clients must respect Motability and RSA Motability, whilst Motability and RSA Motability must respect their clients.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Flymo View Post
    I think both Paul and Elephant123 raise important points, and I'm sure that the written word in this textual only forum is letting us down to some extent, as it's impossible to communicate every nuance of what is being said.


    Motability is certainly not "free" - at the very least you give up some, or, more commonly, all of your Mobility component. In return, you get a package that is more generous over costs than any retail offering I'm aware of. The nearest retail offering is likely to be Peugeot "Just Add Fuel" - but that has a bunch of conditions that don't apply to Motability - minimum of two years full UK licence, minimum of two years No Claims Discount that you can apply to the insurance, worn parts are at the customer's expense (so the driver has to pay for tyres, brakes etc.), a maximum age of 75 and minimum age of as high as 30 for some models. It's also subject to financial status, as it involves a regulated consumer credit agreement

    There's certainly no retail offering that will lease a new car to a 16 year old (the lowest age that someone with a Mobility component can drive a car) with insurance included for around £260 per month. In not aware of any way a driver under 18 would get insured with a £75 excess other than Motability. Most insurers impose a mandatory excess of the order of £500 on drivers in this age bracket, if they will cover them at all.


    However, there have to be some limits to keep the costs affordable and to maintain public respect for the scheme by ensuring that Motability vehicles are for the purposes of the disabled person. These issues led to the controversial rule changes.

    There are some who have been hard hit by the changes - they've come to rely on Motability to be mobile, then, through no fault of their own, they cannot get another agreement that suits their specific needs. I still don't understand why RSA Motability would not accept a copy of the shambolic's carer's French documentation accompanied by a translation from a translator recognised by the English courts at shambolic's expense. Such a translation could be relied on in court by RSA Motability if necessary, so I can't see why it is not acceptable.

    It's very unlikely that the French authorities would issue an official document in English. Would DVLA issue an official letter in Hungarian just because some Hungarian insurance company refused to accept an English version accompanied by a translation into Hungarian from a recognised translator?

    If you leave someone without a reasonable way ahead, of course they will be upset.


    On the other hand, there were undoubtedly those who abused the scheme. Motability was never intended to provide cars for disabled people to gift to a friend or relative who lives elsewhere and uses it for their own purposes wholly unconnected with the disabled person for most of the time.


    As Elephant123 says, there are few areas more focused on the letter of the rules than insurance, not least because of the large sums potentially at stake. Young drivers wondering why they're being quoted thousands of pounds to insure an old heap third party only often don't think why. If they made a mistake driving stupidly on the motorway that causes a car transporter full of new Ferraris to swerve and crash through the parapet of a flyover, catching fire and closing the M25 for eight hours, their insurance company might have to pay out millions of pounds.



    Motability is not free, but it does cushion those eligible for the scheme who would face the greatest financial hurdles to motoring from the costs, whilst those who decide to stay outside the scheme for whatever reason (including being able to make their own cheaper arrangements) can take Mobility component payments instead.

    Motability gives flexibility that you are unlikely to find elsewhere. If you sign a commercial three year contract hire agreement and your financial or mobility circumstances changed, it's unlikely you could walk away without a hefty termination fee. With Motability, if your financial or mobility circumstances change and you have to terminate an agreement early, you may well get a proportion of your advance payment refunded.


    Much as we might wish otherwise, Motability can never be all things to all eligible people. There are going to be those whose driving or insurance records are too poor to be allowed on the scheme insurance, no matter how deserving their case is. There are going to be those who do not treat their vehicle or the scheme rules with respect, causing financial and/or reputational damage to the scheme.

    However, it is wrong to look on Motability clients as anything other than paying customers.

    Ultimately, respect must be shown both ways. Clients must respect Motability and RSA Motability, whilst Motability and RSA Motability must respect their clients.
    Pretty much all of the above. (although young person excesses are still higher than £75 even on Motability, but that's to be expected in the modern insurance industry. Its £450 if you are between 16-20 and don't have the pass plus, and £300 if you do have the pass plus, and its £300 If you are 21-25 without pass plus, and £200 if you do have pass plus. Also your excess is £100, regardless of age, if you drive on a provisional, or if you are within the first 12 months of passing your test)
    Last edited by Elephant123; 04-25-2014 at 11:33 PM.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Lighttouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    3,799
    One thing to remember about Motability is that is was set up to ultimately benefit disabled people who were discriminated against due to lack of accessible public transport.

    Motability also gives disabled people the opportunity to customise their choice of vehicle to meet their individual access needs.

    It affords disabled people to lead independent lives. It's not a luxury - it's an access issue.

    The other thing to remember is the 'client is king'. People who work with Motability wouldn't be there but for you and your allowance.

    I reckon it's about 30% cheaper going down the Motability route than buying a new car outside the scheme.

    If, like me, you run an ex-notability car that's over 6 years old it becomes more cost-effective to run it yourself as the depreciation is decreased and there are insuance companies that target ex-mobility car users that offer an extremely competitive rate with many additional benefits at no extra cost. https://www.fishinsurance.co.uk/disa...-insurance.php
    Last edited by Lighttouch; 04-26-2014 at 11:23 AM.

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    2,293
    No offence intended, I was having a bad day yesterday and I was rubbed-up the wrong way.

    I apologise if I caused anything untoward, please accept them so that we can move on.
    Motability Car History
    05/09-05/12; Nissan Qashqai 1.5 Diesel Tekna; 36,500 miles; avg 41.1mpg
    06/12-07/15; Ford C-Max 2.0 Diesel Titanium Powershift; 35,400 miles; avg 37.8mpg
    07/15-09/17; Skoda Octavia 1.6 Diesel SE-L DSG; 28,200miles; avg 43.9mpg
    09/17-Present; VW Touran 1.4 Petrol SEL DSG; 11,600miles; avg 35.9mpg (28.6 - 43.9mpg)

    Click here to send me an email with any private Motoring questions you may have. Replies usually within 48hrs

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Princes Risborough, Bucks
    Posts
    100
    I'm finding this a bit strange.

    My friend was required to supply an official certificate to a UK government department that was issued by a German government department. All that was required was to go to a "legal translator" to have the document officially translated into English. This was certified (notarized) with an official stamp. The original document with it's translation were accepted. I can't imagine why this wouldn't be good enough for RSA Motability.

    On the issue of Motability. I understand how their huge buying power enables them to get the most amazing discounts on cars and car insurance but all the same how amazing! It would be impossible for any of us to negotiate such an affordable deal for ourselves. I looked into the normal costs of this sort of leasing and I could hardly believe how much of a reduction Motability can get.

Similar Threads

  1. PIP 20 metre rule
    By removed in forum Benefits - help & advice on disability benefits, incapacity benefits, ESA and DLA
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-26-2014, 03:54 PM
  2. Can DWP over rule tribunal decision?
    By wobble1 in forum Benefits - help & advice on disability benefits, incapacity benefits, ESA and DLA
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-16-2013, 09:41 AM
  3. PIP Consultation - Response - 4 week rule unchanged
    By ians13770 in forum Motoring - help & advice on cars for disabled people, Blue Badge and Motability
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-04-2013, 08:44 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •