Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Disability benefits  →  Thread

Motability’s fat cat bosses £1.7m pay! + £2b cash reserves

 < 1 2 3

 

past caring
forum member

Welfare Rights Adviser Southwark Law Centre Peckham

Send message

Total Posts: 789

Joined: 25 February 2014

John Birks - 23 May 2018 08:36 AM

The current system is a large scheme operating in a monopoly environment.

If the policy intent is to provide everyone who has a set level of difficulty with mobility (fixed by entitlement to DLA HRM/PIP ERM) with the option of a car, then I don’t see how it can really be otherwise. How would one introduce competition? Some providers require a claimant to give up only £30 p/w of their DLA/PIP mobility component whilst others want the full whack? Some providers will offer a Mitsubishi Outlander whilst others will offer only a Renault Cleo (thus trousering a bigger wedge of the mobility component)? How could competition be introduced (real competition that is, which didn’t see one provider become an effective monopoly within 12 months) whilst at the same time ensuring all claimants in all parts of the country were able to access the same vehicles on the same terms?

     
John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice, Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 956

Joined: 16 June 2010

past caring - 23 May 2018 10:15 AM
John Birks - 23 May 2018 08:36 AM

The current system is a large scheme operating in a monopoly environment.

If the policy intent is to provide everyone who has a set level of difficulty with mobility (fixed by entitlement to DLA HRM/PIP ERM) with the option of a car, then I don’t see how it can really be otherwise. How would one introduce competition? Some providers require a claimant to give up only £30 p/w of their DLA/PIP mobility component whilst others want the full whack? Some providers will offer a Mitsubishi Outlander whilst others will offer only a Renault Cleo (thus trousering a bigger wedge of the mobility component)? How could competition be introduced (real competition that is, which didn’t see one provider become an effective monopoly within 12 months) whilst at the same time ensuring all claimants in all parts of the country were able to access the same vehicles on the same terms?

I’m only pointing out how it is and how it may be changed and guessing at the reasons for this.

There is only one provider - that would make it a monopoly.

By having a number of providers (Finance) that would introduce competition.

Whether it’s better or worse doesn’t really matter to those lobbying for change as;

The type of financing available on the market now did not exist when the scheme commenced. In that sense motability used to be unique.

It also used to be a crutch for the British car industry.

Other finance providers may or will look on in envy at the pie and may want a portion.

They can offer a minimum 20% vat reduction but (presumably) can’t compete directly with the scheme. Maybe if a dealer did then MO would use their size by way of a threat to withdraw?

     
Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior Welfare Rights Officer (Take-Up), Salford WRS.

Send message

Total Posts: 1816

Joined: 17 June 2010

Also has to be borne in mind that a government taxed by the job of getting motorists off the road for environmental reasons but faced with the dilemma of losing votes if they directly attack “motorists” as a homogenous group will find much solace in an approach that removes disabled motorists or their carers by removing PIP or by a well received attack on the “fat cat” of Motability whose end result is changes to the scheme which… take more disabled motorists off the road.

Motability significantly props up the new car nonsense and that can’t be underestimated.

Few will shed tears because the voters in question will have been sold the idea that some kind of justice has been served.

Nicely fits in with the bogus blue badge/abused blue badge stuff too.

Got to say that targeting the weak by targeting their rich representatives is pretty shrewd stuff.

     
Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 1985

Joined: 14 March 2014

NAO is undertaking an investigation - https://www.nao.org.uk/work-in-progress/the-motability-scheme/

     
BC Welfare Rights
forum member

The Brunswick Centre, Kirklees & Calderdale

Send message

Total Posts: 952

Joined: 22 July 2013

I think that Lord Sterling is rather cross about this…

https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/work-and-pensions/Letter_from_Lord_Sterling.pdf

edit
Sorry, senior moment.
This is an old letter already referred to at post #14.

      [ Edited: 11 Oct 2018 at 01:08 pm by BC Welfare Rights ]
John Birks
forum member

Welfare Rights and Debt Advice, Stockport Council

Send message

Total Posts: 956

Joined: 16 June 2010