MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Citroen » Relay » 1995
Dream car or Budget, which comes first? Tell us your thoughts | No thanks

Citroen Relay MOT Results

Registered in 1995
52.5% pass rate
from 61 tests in 2017
More MoT Results
Failure rates by item

Here you can drill down into the failure rates for each item on the test. We've also compared the rates to the average results for 1995 vans and highlighted areas where the Citroen Relay is unusually good or bad.

  • 30% fail on Suspension
    • 20% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 13% fail on Component mounting
      • 13% fail on Spring mounting (3 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 8.2% fail on Subframe mounting (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 9.8% fail on Drive shafts (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 9.8% fail on Front drive shafts (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
        • 9.8% fail on Constant velocity joints (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 6.6% fail on Suspension arms
      • 6.6% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 3.3% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 3.3% fail on Condition
    • 1.6% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 1.6% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 1.6% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 1.6% fail on Rear
  • 26% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 6.6% fail on Battery
    • 6.6% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 6.6% fail on Fog lamp
    • 6.6% fail on Stop lamp
    • 6.6% fail on Direction indicators
      • 6.6% fail on Flashing type
        • 4.9% fail on Side repeaters
        • 1.6% fail on Individual lamps
    • 6.6% fail on Headlamp aim
    • 4.9% fail on Horn
    • 3.3% fail on Position lamps
      • 3.3% fail on Rear lamps
    • 3.3% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 3.3% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.3% fail on Headlamp
  • 26% fail on Brakes
    • 18% fail on Brake performance
      • 15% fail on Front wheels (180% worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 8.2% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 6.6% fail on Rear wheels
      • 4.9% fail on Brake imbalance (3 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 3.3% fail on Service brake performance
    • 9.8% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 9.8% fail on Components
        • 4.9% fail on Pipes
        • 4.9% fail on Hoses
        • 1.6% fail on Valves
    • 1.6% fail on Parking brake
      • 1.6% fail on Condition
    • 1.6% fail on Service brake control components
      • 1.6% fail on Pedal
        • 1.6% fail on Anti-slip
  • 16% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 9.8% fail on Vehicle structure (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
      • 9.8% fail on Chassis (2 times worse than other 1995 vans)
    • 8.2% fail on Body condition
    • 1.6% fail on Doors
      • 1.6% fail on Drivers
  • 9.8% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 9.8% fail on Seat belts
      • 6.6% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 3.3% fail on Attachment (15 times worse than other 1995 vans)
  • 9.8% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 8.2% fail on Wipers
    • 4.9% fail on Washers
  • 8.2% fail on Steering
    • 3.3% fail on Steering system
      • 1.6% fail on Ball joint
      • 1.6% fail on Track rod end
    • 3.3% fail on Power steering
      • 1.6% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 1.6% fail on Other components
    • 1.6% fail on Steering operation
  • 8.2% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 8.2% fail on Exhaust system
  • 1.6% fail on Towbars
    • 1.6% fail on Vehicle structure
  • 1.6% fail on Tyres
    • 1.6% fail on Tread depth
  • 1.6% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 1.6% fail on Registration plate