MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » LDV » Cub » 2000

LDV Cub MOT Results

Registered in 2000
38.9% pass rate
from 108 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 2000 vans and highlighted areas where the LDV Cub is unusually good or bad.

  • 41% fail on Suspension (73% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 39% fail on Prescribed areas (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 27% fail on Component mounting (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 23% fail on Spring mounting (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.8% fail on Subframe mounting
    • 8.3% fail on Leaf springs (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 7.4% fail on Pins and bushes (13 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 7.4% fail on Shackle (16 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.93% fail on Condition
    • 3.7% fail on Anti-roll bars
      • 2.8% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.93% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 2.8% fail on Front suspension joints
    • 0.93% fail on Suspension arms
      • 0.93% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
    • 0.93% fail on Shock absorbers
      • 0.93% fail on Condition
  • 32% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
    • 13% fail on Headlamp aim (110% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 7.4% fail on Position lamps
      • 6.5% fail on Front lamps
      • 0.93% fail on Rear lamps
    • 6.5% fail on Headlamps
      • 6.5% fail on Headlamp
    • 6.5% fail on Stop lamp
    • 4.6% fail on Rear fog lamp
      • 4.6% fail on Fog lamp
    • 2.8% fail on Battery
    • 2.8% fail on Registration plate lamp
    • 0.93% fail on Direction indicators
      • 0.93% fail on Flashing type
        • 0.93% fail on Individual lamps
    • 0.93% fail on Horn
  • 32% fail on Brakes (53% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 19% fail on Hydraulic systems (83% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 18% fail on Components (85% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 14% fail on Pipes (160% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 5.6% fail on Hoses
        • 0.93% fail on Cylinders
      • 2.8% fail on Leaks (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 19% fail on Brake performance
      • 13% fail on Front wheels (170% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 8.3% fail on Rear wheels
      • 4.6% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 1.9% fail on Service brake performance
      • 0.93% fail on Brake imbalance
    • 1.9% fail on Hub components
      • 0.93% fail on Brake back plates
      • 0.93% fail on Wheel cylinder
    • 1.9% fail on Restricted movement
    • 0.93% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.93% fail on Actuating linkage mounting
  • 18% fail on Driver's view of the road
    • 9.3% fail on Wipers
    • 4.6% fail on Washers
    • 2.8% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.93% fail on Mirrors
  • 13% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
    • 9.3% fail on Exhaust system
    • 2.8% fail on Emissions not tested
    • 1.9% fail on Emissions
    • 1.9% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.93% fail on Cap
      • 0.93% fail on System
  • 9.3% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 7.4% fail on Body condition
    • 3.7% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 3.7% fail on Chassis
  • 6.5% fail on Steering
    • 5.6% fail on Steering system
      • 4.6% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.93% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.93% fail on Steering arm
    • 0.93% fail on Power steering
      • 0.93% fail on Other components
  • 5.6% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 5.6% fail on Seat belts
      • 5.6% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 2.8% fail on Towbars (5 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 2.8% fail on Vehicle structure (7 times worse than other 2000 vans)
  • 2.8% fail on Tyres
    • 1.9% fail on Condition
    • 1.9% fail on Tread depth
  • 0.93% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.93% fail on Condition
  • 0.93% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.93% fail on Registration plate