Press sows seeds of Blue Badge confusion

Blue Badge abuse is an area fraught with confusion. But Helen Dolphin says that some recent newspaper coverage has done nothing to bring clarity to an already confused situation

I hadn’t realised until recently just how much misunderstanding and confusion there is in the great wide world to do with Motability and the Blue Badge scheme. This was really brought home to me by an article in The Sunday Times entitled “State hands out BMWs to ‘disabled’ in £500m scandal” and even more so by some of the letters to the editor published the following week.  

For those who did not get a chance to read this article it basically reported that a large proportion of vehicles on the Motability scheme are being abused by disabled people’s friends and family who are using the vehicles for their own benefit. It was particularly keen to emphasise that 11,000 of the vehicles on the scheme are BMWs and Mercedes. But what it didn’t make very clear is that it actually makes little difference to the taxpayer what vehicle someone chooses.

The article also reported that car dealers are actively promoting the scheme to claimants’ relatives knowing full well the disabled person will hardly use it. They quoted one dealer as saying “that’s the way the scheme is for 50% of people”. They also quoted a Blue Badge fraud investigator as saying “we have got cases where the person has a zero-rated tax disc, they have their relative’s badge and they have a Motability car”.

I am very much in favour of Blue Badge fraud investigators as this is a scheme where fraud is rife but it is quite possible for someone to be legitimately using a Motability car but abusing the Blue Badge scheme. It is also much harder to detect if the Motability scheme is being abused as in many cases the disabled person is not the driver and in some cases the car is not registered at their address.

One of the letters that was sent in read: “As the driver of a ‘proper’ disability vehicle for my wheelchair-bound, brain-damaged wife, I frequently find disability parking slots at hospitals and supermarkets chock full of ‘normal cars’.”

This is really no surprise considering less than 10% of vehicles on the scheme are actually adapted as many disabled people do not require any adaptations and there are of course many disabled passengers. Blind and partially sighted people, for instance, have an entitlement to a Blue Badge, but are clearly unlikely ever to drive any vehicle in which the badge might legitimately at the same time be used.

This confusion between the Blue Badge and Motability schemes was also made clear by another reader who wrote: “It is not only the relatives of the disabled who abuse the Motability Blue Badge scheme.”

I hadn’t realised that people thought it was one and the same but that might explain why people who have been told they can legitimately use a Motability car really do think they can use the Blue Badge even if the disabled person is not with them.

I was annoyed by The Sunday Times article as I felt it was implying that disabled people should all be driving the cheapest cars possible. I also didn’t like some of the implications which I felt were unsubstantiated.  Although I am sure there are people abusing this scheme there is no evidence to suggest it’s such a large percentage of scheme users. I also know that without my Motability car I would not be as independent as I am and I think this is true of the many genuine users of this scheme.

Much the same can be said of the Blue Badge. It offers legitimate users like me increased independence by providing access to parking which is appropriate to our needs.  Except, of course, when those parking spaces are occupied by genuine abusers of the badge, many of whom act without the consent or knowledge of the disabled person to whom the badge, or the car, properly belongs.