logo
The boss behind billion-pound car scheme Motability caught in Britain's benefits row

The boss behind billion-pound car scheme Motability caught in Britain's benefits row

Independent02-04-2025

It was meant to be one of Britain's quieter welfare programmes – a behind-the-scenes scheme to help people with serious disabilities lease a car, using their benefits.
But Motability has become a lightning rod in 2025, with questions over billion-pound profits, social media outrage over perceived abuse and a leadership team still battling an old reputation for high pay and poor PR.
The company's latest filings show a total salary bill of £100.8m in 2024. The highest-paid director – understood to be CEO Andrew Miller – received a salary of £460,000 and a total package worth £747,000, down slightly from £765,000 the previous year.
Collectively, directors earned a £1.2m in salary rising to £3.4m overall, including pensions and benefits.
Meanwhile the controversial motor scheme, which allows people claiming a qualifying mobility allowance such as Personal Independence Payment (PIP) to lease a car, has swelled to include more than 815,000 users – up by 200,000 in just two years.
Amid £5bn in government welfare cuts and viral social media commentary, some critics have questioned whether the scheme is still fit for purpose. But according to Motability itself, 96 per cent of its fleet is made up of economy vehicles, not luxury cars, and the vast majority of customers are fully entitled to what they receive.
At the helm of the operation is Miller, the low-key yet media-savvy CEO of Motability Operations (MO), the commercial arm that runs the scheme. He took over in 2020 from Mike Betts, whose extravagant pay package drew fury from MPs and disability rights campaigners alike. Betts was once paid £1.7m in salary plus a £2.2m bonus – a sum the then-chair of the Work and Pensions Committee called "obscene".
While Betts came under fire in some quarters for his luxury lifestyle, Miller has been keen to reset the public image of Motability. That is perhaps highlighted by recent job offerings for a new public affairs manager, senior strategic communications manager and director of public policy, the latter of which the Telegraph reported as being advertised on a six-figure salary. Both the other positions were above £50,000 salaries, while a lower-salaried job of stakeholder engagement manager is now posted with a remit of 'development of relationships with industry and disability groups'.
As for Miller, his background, unusually for a car boss, is in media and consumer brands. He previously served as CEO and CFO of Guardian Media Group, CEO of McDonalds Nordics and held senior finance roles at Auto Trader, Procter & Gamble and PepsiCo. He has also served as a non-executive director at Channel 4 and the AA – experience that has given him a feel for both the political and reputational pressure that can weigh on a publicly accountable organisation.
At his previous roles, Miller has gained a reputation as an expert in managing significant business transition: The Guardian into the digital age, McDonalds through the rise of fast-food delivery, now Motability and its attempts to electrify the best part of a million vehicles in under a decade.
Under Miller's stewardship, Motability is trying to stay ahead of scrutiny and technology alike.
In 2024, the company made a £565m loss – a dramatic fall from its £748m pre-tax profit the year before. Revenue, however, grew nearly 25 per cent to £6.9bn, offset in part due to major investments into the transition to electric vehicles and customer support amid a punishing inflationary climate. The shift includes the installation of 66,000 free home chargers for customers – part of a £300m push to electrify the fleet.
Still, Miller's primary challenge is not just modernising the business but defending its very legitimacy. Owned by four banks – HSBC, Lloyds, NatWest and Barclays – Motability Operations does not pay dividends. Its profits are either reinvested or donated to the overseeing charity Motability, which then distributes grants to customers most in need. But in a cost-of-living crisis, that arrangement is under increasing scrutiny, given the banks still profit from loans interest, management fees and bond issuance.
In part that is down to Motability's success, or at least growth: the more cars they need to buy and the more customers there are to service, the more their borrowing needs can increase. Still, that has led to further critique of the entire arrangement.
In a rare media intervention, Miller recently wrote in The Times that the company removes thousands of ineligible users each year, and that for every £1 spent via disability allowances, £1.50 is returned to the UK economy. He also warned of 'sickfluencers' abusing the system – a nod to the TikTok-fuelled backlash that has sometimes muddied public perception of the scheme.
Miller's defence of the company is also data-driven. The organisation now provides a quarter of a million used cars into the second-hand market each year, making it the largest single-source vehicle supplier in the UK. And while it no longer makes the blockbuster profits seen under Betts, Motability's economic footprint – it claims £4.3bn in annual UK contribution – suggests it's a far cry from the gravy train some accuse it of being.
Still, the storm hasn't fully cleared. Motability has become emblematic of a larger political debate about who is deserving of state support. That argument has only intensified in light of recent welfare reforms – and for Miller, the pressure is unlikely to lift any time soon.
In short, Motability remains one of Britain's most important but misunderstood welfare institutions. And for Andrew Miller – who has swapped the newspaper boardroom for one of the most scrutinised jobs in the third sector – keeping the wheels turning smoothly is proving to be anything but straightforward.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Welfare rebellion looms for Starmer despite concessions to Labour rebels
Welfare rebellion looms for Starmer despite concessions to Labour rebels

The Herald Scotland

time21 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Welfare rebellion looms for Starmer despite concessions to Labour rebels

The concessions included protecting people claiming personal independence payment (Pip) from changes due to come into effect in November 2026, and rowing back plans to cut the health-related element of universal credit. But backbench anger has continued to simmer, with a statement from Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall laying out the concessions on Monday receiving a negative response. Liz Kendall received a negative response to several concessions on Monday (Dominic Lipinski/PA) Asked whether he was 'confident' that the concessions had done enough to secure passage of the Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill, disabilities minister Sir Stephen Timms would only tell Sky News: 'I certainly hope it passes.' Some 126 Labour MPs had previously signed a 'reasoned amendment' proposed by Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier that would have stopped the legislation if approved. That rebellion appeared to have been averted after Dame Meg described concessions agreed on Friday as a 'workable compromise'. But in the Commons on Monday, she was one of several senior Labour figures to raise concerns about the Government's revised proposals, while another MP involved in negotiations, Debbie Abrahams, suggested ministers had rowed back on what had been agreed. A second amendment rejecting the Bill has been put forward by York Central MP Rachael Maskell with the backing of 138 disability groups, saying disabled people had 'yet to have agency in this process'. Ms Maskell's amendment has been signed by 39 Labour MPs – far fewer than the 83 needed to overturn Sir Keir's majority, but enough to deliver the largest rebellion of his premiership just before the first anniversary of Labour's election victory. Other sceptical MPs are expected to abstain on Tuesday, but could vote against the Bill next week if there are no further concessions. Sir Stephen Timms said he hoped the Bill would pass (House of Commons/PA) Ms Maskell said there were 'loads more' who had said they would reject the Government's plans. She told BBC Breakfast: 'I engaged with so many people yesterday that were saying: 'I'm not signing the recent amendment but I am voting down the Bill.'' One of the chief concerns revolves around a review of Pip to be carried out by Sir Stephen and 'co-produced' with disabled people. His review is not expected to report until autumn next year, making it difficult to incorporate his findings into the Pip changes due to take place at the same time. Ms Abrahams suggested the timing meant the outcome of the review was 'pre-determined', while Sarah Owen, another select committee chairwoman, warned it could create a 'three-tier' benefit system. Groups including Disability Rights UK and Disabled People Against Cuts criticised the Government's claim that Sir Stephen's review would be 'co-produced' with them and urged Labour rebels to stand firm. They said: 'The Government have made it very clear that they are intent on slashing the support that so many disabled people rely on to work and live independently, no matter how many disabled people tell them what a harmful policy this will be.' Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said her party's MPs would vote against the proposals, describing them as 'not serious welfare reform' and saying ministers had 'watered down the small savings Labour were making'. The original proposals were expected to save £4.8 billion by 2030, but Ms Kendall revealed on Monday that the revised proposals were likely to save less than half that figure.

Labour's cynical attempt at concession on social security cuts
Labour's cynical attempt at concession on social security cuts

Scotsman

timean hour ago

  • Scotsman

Labour's cynical attempt at concession on social security cuts

Disabled people wake up every day in fear of what the UK Government will announce next. ​The news that their cruel social security cuts will only affect new recipients is not a U-turn. It is a sad and cynical attempt at concession following a rebellion of Labour MPs, and it will still have a horrific impact on the lives of disabled people across the UK. Also in 2021 a BBC investigation included the case of Errol Graham who starved to death in 2018 after his benefits were stopped when he failed to attend a work capability assessment due to his ill health. Even the former Conservative welfare secretary Iain Duncan Smith resigned following the publication of a similar plan to Labour's saying that it would be 'indefensible' and that 'top slicing never works'. Following the backlash there appeared to be a deal made between Starmer and over 100 MPs who rebelled which confirmed that people already in receipt of PIP and UC will continue as normal. It will only be new claimants facing harsh eligibility assessments which will see people go without the crucial support they need. This is not good enough. How does this help people who acquire disabilities in later life? How does this help people who are disabled in accidents? Anyone can become disabled in their lifetime, and with our ageing population, more and more people will experience disability in old age. Starmer has created a two-tier benefits system. It's astonishing that a Labour Government would contemplate such cruel and inhuman cuts at all. However, we've seen over the past 11 months of Starmer in No.10 that he's nothing more than a Tory in Labour clothing. We don't know how these reforms will impact our society long term. But we do know now that disabled people are not safe, respected, or supported under Labour in Holyrood or Westminster.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store