Motability Scheme  Avis 

Every time I have had any interaction with the customer service team at Motability they have been faultless.
I rang them on Friday about my wife’s motability car as it is due to be changed so we contacted them to confirm our options. We spoke to Alice who was polite, friendly, and professional like all the other people we have had dealings with. If only all companies could be this good.

I have been a Motability customer for around 6 years, and this experience has been extremely stressful and upsetting. Motability is supposed to provide disabled customers with reliable, accessible and supportive mobility, but I have felt completely let down.
I have a neurodevelopmental disability and significant communication and processing difficulties. Having a Motability car is not simply a luxury for me – it is essential to my independence, attending medical appointments, shopping, supporting my daughter and being able to leave the house without relying on other people or public transport.
Despite explaining my circumstances and providing supporting evidence, I have found the communication around the end of my lease and my ability to secure suitable insurance and continued mobility incredibly difficult to deal with. The uncertainty has caused me a huge amount of anxiety and distress.
What has been particularly disappointing is the lack of understanding of how these situations affect disabled customers. There needs to be much better communication, reasonable support and consideration for customers who have disabilities that affect communication, processing information and dealing with unexpected changes.
I should not have had to fight so hard simply to have my disability-related needs understood and to maintain my independence.
Motability needs to remember that behind every lease is a real person whose independence, daily life and wellbeing can depend on that vehicle. Disabled customers deserve to be listened to, treated fairly and supported properly – especially when things go wrong.
I sincerely hope Motability learns from my experience and makes significant improvements so that other disabled customers do not have to experience the same level of stress and uncertainty.

A scheme designed to support disabled people should never leave a disabled customer feeling that they have to fight just to have their needs recognised.

Leased a car through the scheme and the Vehicle had loads of problems on delivery. You are not protected under the consumer rights act 2015 so you have no comeback, because we would not except this vehicle back when it went back to dealer we was banned from leasing a car for 12 months. My wife can no longer attend crucial medical appointments and has lost her independence.

I am a single mother with three children, including a severely disabled child. My husband recently left us, leaving me as the sole driver. I am terrified of driving the massive WAV we currently have. Motability Operations agreed I need to downsize to a safe, manageable VW Caddy. However, the Motability Foundation has refused the grant for the Advance Payment.Because I have zero savings after my partner left, their refusal leaves my disabled child and family completely isolated and unable to travel safely. I have exhausted the complaints procedure and received no help. This is a massive safeguarding failure for a disabled child.

Absolute joke don’t bother you’re better off buying a car and paying your self and having nothing to do with this service.

My car has been off the road for over 4 months and it was only 4 months old when the issues started. Garage still can’t fix it but yep, you guessed it, motability still taking the money off me.

I returned the hire car requested the lease be closed under all the relevant rights and yep, you guessed it, took the hire car and haven’t canceled the lease. Can’t speak to anyone at weekends and no they don’t do call backs so it’s left to me to do all the chasing.

Paying for a service I’m not gettinf
Paying for a car I’m not getting
Chasing them to do their own job

This causes so much stress to people honestly don’t bother it’s a scam of a scheme.

Diabolical

UPDATE: 07/09/26

Someone from RAC/Motability has been in touch it is now being sorted. Thank you

UPDATE: 28/09/26

Miraculously the vehicle is now fixed and notability have declined my request to end the lease. I do NOT care the vehicle has been amazingly sorted now I don’t want it and you are gonna lose money. I am now having to pay you to cancel the lease?! Absolute joke organisation just clearly stingy government contracts.

I CAN NOT DRIVE THAT CAR it is dangerous its breaks on its own it swerves into on coming traffic it’s been off the road longer then it was usable. Someone needs to cancel my policy IMMEDIATELY charge me the £250 I don’t care just end this lease

Switch car hire Oxford are not to be trusted, they actively falsified and lie about damage.

Switch car hire are dispicable Dont expect motobility to help you expose the corrupt business of the car hire company switch. If you can avoid a car hire you should , switch car hire Oxford are the worst typenof people who feed of disabled persons.

I had a hire car from switch the new company that motability is using now when it came I was severely unwell and it was raining very badly but from the way they parked it I could see the whole of the passenger side was smashed in it was in a right state they showed me the damaged bits on an iPad left me the keys and off they went I only used the car once it was the most horrendous car I’ve ever had the misfortune to drive it actually hurt me to drive it so ended up getting my husband to take me to where I needed to go the only other time I used it was to drop it off to brindley motors when I went to get my own car back they didn’t do a walk round with me they just took the keys gave me mine and that was that. Weeks later I received an email from direct line asking me to upload pics of the damage to the hire car I called and said what damage the only damage I was aware of was the side which was pointed out to me when the car was delivered, but now they are saying that the front headlight had been scuffed and damaged and I had to pay £100 excess I was absolutely enraged ive had no support from motability and direct line said because I have no evidence to prove otherwise the claim had to go ahead which has cost me £100 today I’m taking this to the ombudsman because anything could have happened to that car once I’d left it at brindley so my advice to anyone having a car from switch take plenty pictures before you hand it back they are a dispicable company and I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw them

My 5-month-old KV4 had a battery problem. Initially,. I was informed that a new battery was required. 4-month waiting list. Kia then suddenly decided to repair, not replace. I am still waiting for the car 8 weeks later.
The problem is that no one within Motability took responsibility. I was passed around from RAC Motability, who were particularly awful, to Customer Service Motability for weeks. I was eventually offered an option to replace the car, but once Kia then decided to repair, not replace, the battery, without informing me, Motability said I couldn't, as it was outside the consumer advice, despite the fact that this car is 5 months old and 5K, and I am getting a battery repair? Apart from this, my main complaint is the lack of updates/correspondance keep me updated, and as I say, being passed around between the departments, with each department saying it's not their remit to help...just so frustrating, and I am now in an almost brand-new car with a repaired battery, although I still do not have my back, 8 weeks later.
In answer to your reply, I have already made an offcial compliant to your customer service but problems of communication are still there...

First few years fine. My son now unable to go to school due to car removal.
Through no deliberate fault of his own, l made an oversight mistake. Someone l never knew had issues with their driving license was added as a driver. I appealed and never heard back.
Then we reaplied and was told even with a new apointee we do not qualify. My son is being discrimibated against and penalised for what is not his faul. The previous appointee has nothing to do with a previous mistake made. (Discrimination one) Banding onother person to a previous persons mistake!! Discrmination.

They send a link to appeal, we did. That form is really biased because it asks someone new to appeal as a previous appointee. Discrimination and beauraucracy This is very unfair and unprofessional practice You hold someone responsible for what they have not done. The disabled person is held responsible. Very ruthless even after a name was removed off the drivers list, they went onto still hold it against others who applied and told to appeal..

Two things have happrned here. Racial discrimination has also occured.

This company have absolutely no empathy at all. Be very careful, you appeal by email, get no reply. They also discriminate if you all apply from the same family. One person's mistake they made another family members.

I ordered my sons new car last week at Richmond/ MG in Portsmouth & I want to give a big shout out to Michael who deals with motability n helping me chose a new car he was extremely nice & helpful & felt very comfortable with him I got brought coffee& tea (first time using this dealership & I’ve been with motability for years!) it was so quick n easy n I Collected my sons new car today that’s how quick it was!!! Great service & highly recommended!
Thank u motabilty coz not all dealership r so good!

EVERYTHING
AFTER MONTHS OF WAITING WHILST YOU ARGUE AMONGST DEALERSHIP WORKSHOP WHICH BRANCH, WHO TOUCHED THE CAR AND WHO DIDNT, THE CAR RETURNED NOT FIXED, STILL DODGY HANDLE, PULLING TO LEFT, TELLING ME TO KEEP MY HANDS ON THE WHEEL WHEN BOTH ARE FIRMLY PLANTED ON THE WHEEL. ENGINE NOISE SOUNDS LIKE FAN BELT SQUEEKING, DELAY IN MOVING OFF, LEFT FOR HOURS WAITING IN THE HEAT WAVE, BEEN CALLED A LIAR, THEY HAD MY CAR IN JUNE I ONLY GOT IT BACK FEW DAYS AGO....INSURANCE NIGHTMARE, MOT dont make me LAUGH, MAINTENANCE NAHHH DONT NEED THAT ITS FINE, MOTABILITY IS HELLISH..DONT WASTE YOUR TIME, MONEY, OR ENERGY ON THEM.
IM TAKING LEGAL ACTION AS THEY HAVE MASSIVELY AFFECTED MY MENTAL HEALTH AND PTSD.

I have found the scheme ideal for my needs and I have always found quick answers to my questions and solutions to my issues

My mobility vehicle went in for a MOT, & it failed its MOT, & it seems that the RAC are in charge as to whether you qualify for a curtesy vehicle while you vehicle is being repaired, & as it will possibly be 48 hours that I will be without transport, the best they can offer is a taxi, as long as I can tell them in advance where I plan to go for that day. My mobility has just be renewed for another 3 yrs, but I will seriously be considering leaving the scheme in 3 yrs if my finances allow, as Labour has ruined the scheme. Happy with the subsequent response from Mobility.

Thank you TOM for helping me on Friday 21st. You done a excellent job talking me though everything.

Just experienced the worse year of my life ! I been harassed lied to and messed around by Ford mobility ! Never again and I don’t really want to use mobility either they caused the problem!

Motability’s Customers Come Second to Its Contractors

One star.

My experience of Motability Operations’ complaints process has left me with the firm impression that protecting appointed contractors takes priority over supporting customers.

After reporting damage discovered following a Kwik Fit appointment on 29 June, I supplied a detailed account, photographs and an explanation of why I was confident the damage had not been visible beforehand. Rather than subjecting its contractor’s account to meaningful scrutiny, Motability accepted Kwik Fit’s assertion that the damage resembled a stone chip and that there was no centre fault.

The purported “investigation” appeared neither independent nor impartial. Kwik Fit denied responsibility, Motability accepted that denial, and my evidence was seemingly treated as secondary. Motability did not satisfactorily explain how it evaluated the competing accounts or why its contractor’s version was preferred.

This exposed what I consider to be a disturbingly cosy and sycophantic relationship with its appointed suppliers. Instead of championing the customer, Motability adopted an arms-length position, leaving me to challenge a contractor with whom Motability itself has the commercial relationship. Its approach made me feel that my honest account was being doubted simply because accepting it would require Motability to confront its supplier.

Motability eventually agreed to disregard the damage when the vehicle is returned, ensuring that I will not be charged. That protected me from a future financial penalty but carefully avoided holding the contractor accountable or arranging the repair. It was not a resolution of the complaint. It was merely an administrative workaround.

Most concerning was the apparent bias within a process portrayed as an investigation. An investigation should test evidence objectively, challenge unsupported assertions and explain its findings transparently. In my experience, Motability did none of those things convincingly. The contractor’s denial effectively became the outcome.

Customers should be able to rely upon Motability to advocate for them when something goes wrong. Instead, I encountered corporate defensiveness, supplier deference and a complaints process that appeared designed to close the matter rather than establish the truth.

My confidence in Motability Operations has been seriously damaged. Based on my experience, its claims of customer support ring hollow when measured against its willingness to accept a contractor’s denial over the detailed evidence and testimony of the customer it supposedly exists to serve.

Given the above along with other recent issues, the tranche of restrictive and diminished cuts to new leases, I have to seriously question the very existence of this quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation.

If I could give them zero stars I would. I have just tried to contact them by email or some other way but they do their best to avoid this at all costs.

You have listed every way I more or less cannot deal with. So how does this help me! The only way I can use is email? I am 63 years old! This bit is very important! I am disabled and you are Motability, no one would think this though the way you are treating me?

So you have a website but no email??? This is exactly what you said:

We no longer offer support by email. However, we have several other ways to contact us, which may help you get a quicker response.

I have to use email a a method of contact due to my autism and hearing issues? so effectively what you are saying is that unless I change then I cannot contact you?

You have my reasonable adjustments and for everyone's enjoyment I have put them on here! This is not an option it is a legal requirement you put them them in place! If you cannot for any reason then there is a legal way of discussing it. That does not mean you are allowed to put them in place and ignore me!!!

Now do it correctly or I will have no choice.

1. Primary contact
A designated contact person should be nominated, with a named email address for all correspondence.
2. Written communication
Communication should take place by email wherever possible, as this is RH’s 
preferred and required method of communication.
3. Acknowledgement and reply
All emails should receive a clear acknowledgement and a substantive personal
reply within 72 business hours, unless an extension is agreed with RH.
4. Clear and direct language
Responses should be unambiguous, specific, and free from vague wording.
5. Ongoing correspondence
Each email should be treated as part of the same continuing thread, with 
reference made to previous messages where appropriate.
6. Accessibility
Communications should be clear, respectful, and provided in writing. Relevant 
text should be included in the body of the email where possible, and 
attachments should be avoided where practical.
7. Meetings and notice
Reasonable advance notice should be given for meetings, tasks, or any required actions.
8. Meeting adjustments
Meetings should take place in quiet, well-lit but not bright settings, with breaks offered where needed and supporting materials provided in advance as Richard Holman really struggles with having to answer
there and then and if you do not support this then you will probably get an answer that is not logical and it is just and automatic reaction.
9. Hearing support
Appropriate hearing support should be provided where required.
10. All protestations of Mr Richard Holman on the days are to be ignored and if it is surmised by the person conducting the meeting that Richard Holman needs something then this must be provided. Strict reasoning why this has been needed must be supplied in writing to Richard Holman as is reasoning why something has not been supplied.
11. Safeguarding
Contact details for the designated safeguarding officer should be made 
available,
12. Autonomy and approval
At all times, Richard Holman retains his autonomy and the right to veto any 
selection, proposal, or arrangement as he sees fit. All nominated individuals and any similar appointments or arrangements must be approved by RH.
13. Legal basis
These reasonable adjustments are requested under the Equality Act 2010. Relevant case law includes Rackham v Judicial Appointments Commission (2023) and McQueen v General Optical Council [2023] EAT 36, which underline the need for practical, individualised adjustments for autistic and neurodivergent people.

All of these adjustments relate directly to the diagnosis of autism that Mr Richard Holman has received. Without these reasonable adjustments being implemented, Mr Holman is severely disadvantaged in his ability to use your services. This places him at a substantial detriment and, in his view, constitutes discrimination under UK law.

Rich

My second mobility car has arrived,i ordered the exact same corsa just spent a little more on this one.Due to my relapse and significant pain in my left side and leg,
I called mobility for their support to try and get the vehicle to me,as long driving can start to fluctuate my symptoms,and i didnt have any other support to get the car.

I am very,very happy the way they treated me on the call,with respect and compassion everything was quickly arranged and explained to me
I have my car now and its just lovely,I have taken good care of the first mobility car not because of £250 but because it is not my property and I am sure it will make the next driver very happy.

Yes it was a pleasure talking with mobility to arrange everything 😀

I currently have an electric vehicle through the Motability Scheme, but I do not have practical access to normal home charging. This means I am heavily reliant on public charging, and the real-world cost is substantial.

My recent charging records show me repeatedly paying around 59p per kWh. In less than a month, the amount of public charging required has already cost a significant sum. Extrapolated across a year, this can amount to well over £1,000 simply to charge the vehicle, with the potential for several thousand pounds over a three-year lease.

Motability’s response appears to boil down to: the choice to have an EV was ours.

That completely misses the point.

There is a major difference between technically being given a “choice” and establishing whether that choice is actually suitable, practical and financially sustainable for a disabled customer who cannot charge at home.

I am not suggesting Motability controls the price charged by public charging companies. I am questioning why a scheme specifically designed to provide mobility to disabled people appears to consider it acceptable that customers without home-charging facilities can face such a significant financial disadvantage, and then simply point to the fact that they chose an EV.

Where was the meaningful assessment of charging accessibility? Where was the consideration of the long-term financial implications of relying almost entirely on public charging? What meaningful support is available when those costs become apparent?

I have actual charging records demonstrating the problem. This isn’t speculation.

For an organisation whose entire purpose revolves around providing accessible mobility, I find the attitude deeply disappointing.