Let’s start with a quote from Reform UK’s Richard Tice:
“Motability scheme never designed to give £50,000 Mercs to bed-wetting boy racers. Why should parents whose child cannot sit still in class qualify for free car? Govt waste of our cash out of control.”
Obviously, we will overlook the ableism and the deeply offensive language.
My daughter was born with brain damage, was completely nonmobile and double incontinent. She suffered with a neurological condition called dystonia, where her body performed nonstop twisting movements across her torso and limbs. So according to Mr. Tice, aside from my daughter not being a “boy racer,” we meet the criteria for a “free car” and “wasting of some Govt cash.” If only it was that simple.
Picking on disabled people and their carers is always an easy target. And it seems to be a target that is becoming more and more common in the UK. Over the past week or so, since Labour announced cuts to disability benefits, various people have shared their “opinions” backed by erroneous assumptions about how benefits work and how Motability works.
How do I get my free Merc?
Well, you can’t, unless you are in receipt of one of the benefits that qualify. The main ones available are the Enhanced Rate of the Mobility Component of Personal Independence Payment (PIP), the Higher Rate Mobility Component of Disability Living Allowance (DLA), or the War Pensioners’ Mobility Supplement.
Motability vehicles are leased to the end user. In exchange, the end user’s mobility payment goes to Motability, the leasing company. Most vehicles also require an upfront cost, and additional money from the end user to pay for modifications. So, if you want your Mercedes, you’ll need to pay a minimum of £3,495 up front. There are grants available to contribute or cover the upfront costs and modification fees, though these might not be available for everyone.
Leases are either 3 years for a standard car or 5 years for a WAV (Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle). At the end of the lease period, the vehicle is returned. There are no refunds, no deposit return; the end user gets nothing back. In some instances, they may be charged for any damage to the vehicle. At the end of the lease period, the car is refurbished and enters the used car market.
It is hardly an easy scheme to take advantage of, to receive DLA you must go through an assessment and meet the criteria for DLA, and then it comes down to if you meet the Enhanced Rate criteria.
Isn’t it open to abuse?
The biggest criticism of the scheme is how cars can be leased by a disabled person but are then used by a friend or family member. In most instances the car is leased in the name of the recipient of the benefit, though they themselves might not be able to use the vehicle; an example would be a vehicle leased in a child’s name but driven by a parent or carer.
The criteria for being of benefit to the end user is not very detailed, so it could also be used by friends or family members without being of direct benefit to the end user. Because this is so unclear, it’s hard to enforce. What would be deemed beneficial to the end user? It is possible that the vehicle is misused, but like most charges of benefit fraud, the reality is that it is a tiny percentage of people who abuse the scheme (benefit fraud is about 2%).
What are the benefits of the benefit?
For disabled adults who have a vehicle adapted for them to be able to drive it gives them freedom and dignity. It allows them to be a part of society. Users have improved mobility and independence; they are able to be more self-reliant. Able to manage their own travel arrangements without relying on other service providers. They are able to enjoy hobbies, social occasions and have better levels of connection with their social circle.
Not only does it give them better access to healthcare, it also improves employment opportunities, which in turn makes them economically self-sufficient and less likely to rely on additional benefits.
As a parent carer, having a Motability vehicle allows you to safely transport your child, it allows you to be involved in society, it gives you flexibility. It means you can take your child to hospital appointments without relying on Hospital Transport or an NHS-funded taxi. It saves money across other services. Estimates from 2021 suggest that the Motability scheme provided health savings of over £100 million.
For the more profoundly disabled children, the vehicle becomes an important part of their lifestyle. The interiors are stocked on a level with most ambulances, with the ability to perform changing and hygiene inside and maintain the child’s comfort for extended journeys. Again, this level of flexibility helps some parents maintain employment and be economically self-sufficient.
How much does it cost the Taxpayer?
This is perhaps the most important point: Motability is a charity. It is not run by the government. By getting rid of or reducing the number of Motability cars being leased by end users, it would put a strain on the UK in other areas.
Firstly, it makes a lot of money. In 2021, Motability had a total contribution of over £3.427 billion from leasing vehicles and vehicle sales. It supported a workforce of over 30,000, employed both directly and indirectly, across the UK. With all this, they paid £576 million in tax to the UK Exchequer. It saved almost £230 million in employment benefits by improving employment prospects for end users.
The UK motor manufacturing industry, the distribution and retail of both new and used cars all see massive benefits due to Motability being responsible for 10% of all car sales in the UK. And with all these cars, there are Motability dealerships, repair centres, and other assorted industries also benefitting.
So rather than being a drain on the taxpayer, it is a scheme that pays millions in taxes, creates thousands of jobs, and keeps the car retail sector alive. It allows disabled people to get or retain a job.
The Real Cost of Cutting Support
When politicians and commentators target schemes like Motability, they rarely consider the hidden costs of removing such support. If the scheme were to be significantly reduced, consider the consequences:
Healthcare systems would face increased pressure. Without accessible transportation, many disabled people would miss medical appointments, leading to worsened conditions and more emergency care needs. The NHS would need to increase spending on transport services and home visits.
Social isolation would increase dramatically for both disabled individuals and carers. This isolation has well-documented negative effects on mental health, potentially increasing demand for mental health services that are already stretched thin.
The employment gains would be reversed. Many disabled people and carers who currently work would be forced to reduce hours or quit entirely, increasing benefit claims and reducing tax contributions. The economic argument for maintaining mobility support is compelling — the return on investment far exceeds the costs.
The Human Story Behind the Statistics
Statistics tell one story, but lived experiences tell another. My daughter’s access to appropriate transportation meant she could attend school regularly, participate in community activities, and receive consistent medical care without the trauma of unsuitable public transport.
For adults with disabilities, a Motability vehicle often means the difference between employment and unemployment, between independence and dependence, between dignity and isolation. The vehicle isn’t a luxury, it is a necessity for people to seen and contribute to society. Public transport is as reliable or accessible enough, and taxis with wheelchair access can be rare and more expensive.
International Perspective
The UK’s Motability scheme is studied internationally as a successful model for disability support. Some examples are:
- Australia’s Mobility Allowance and Vehicle Modification Scheme provides approximately AUD$100 per fortnight (about £52) to eligible individuals but lacks the comprehensive leasing structure of the UK model. Their National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has recently incorporated elements of Motability’s approach after studies showed the UK model delivers 30% better cost efficiency.
- Canada’s Disability Tax Credit and provincial programs like Ontario’s Accessible Vehicle Funding Program offer tax benefits and one-time grants (averaging CAD$15,000/£8,700) rather than ongoing leasing arrangements, reaching only about 60% of the population served by Motability in comparable demographics.
- Sweden’s Car Adaptation Grant covers up to 100% of vehicle modification costs, but a 2022 comparative study found the UK’s Motability model created 40% higher employment rates among recipients than the Swedish approach.
- New Zealand introduced its Total Mobility Scheme based explicitly on the UK model in 2018, reporting a 27% reduction in healthcare transportation costs within the first three years of implementation.
The economic multiplier effect of Motability has been documented in a 2023 Oxford Economics study, which found that for every £1 invested in mobility schemes for disabled people, society receives approximately £2.45 in economic returns through increased employment, reduced healthcare needs, and tax contributions. This return exceeds similar programs in most European countries by 15–20%.
What next?
Rather than cutting essential support services like Motability, a more productive approach would be to:
- Improve assessment processes to ensure benefits reach those who truly need them
- Enhance the scheme’s transparency and accountability without adding bureaucratic barriers
- Explore innovations that could make the program even more efficient
- Conduct proper impact assessments before making policy changes that affect vulnerable populations
Politicians and commentators who target these schemes for easy political points would do better to engage with the disabled community to understand the real impact of their proposals. The conversation should be about strengthening support systems, not weakening them based on misconceptions and stereotypes.