Lots of issues here for me, if you are genuinely disabled and you are entitled to a vehicle of your choice at a price then fine. If you choose to add to that cost and have an upgraded vehicle that's also fine and clearly some people would require a different vehicle so that they can get in out of it. One vehicle cannot suit every disabled person's needs that is clear. Many years ago I worked with a lovely guy who was genuinely disabled, from birth, and he had one of the three wheeled "suicide" machines as he called it. He couldn't get around without it, unfortunately he was killed instantly when he was hit by another car on his way to work, the police were adamant that he would have survived if he had been in an ordinary car so that option as suggested is not viable either. At that time I believe they were the only disabled persons vehicle made for the purpose, how could any government in this day and age make one particular model the specified vehicle, if it was a Ford, Vauxhall word shout foul and so it would go on, so allowing a vehicle of choice solvs that issue and ensures genuinely disabled people can have the vehicle that best suits there needs. Now, here's the real rub as far as I'm concerned, who is genuinely disabled and who isn't? Surely it is the fault of the system if the procedure or vetting system is open to widespread abuse and in that instance I also would be infuriated to see someone in an M3 or any other vehicle who clearly isn't entitled to one. Sort that out and surely over half of this argument goes away?