MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Peugeot » Expert » 2000
Do you have a minute to answer an electric vehicle survey? Start the survey | No thanks

Peugeot Expert MOT Results

Registered in 2000
52.2% pass rate
from 347 tests in 2020
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 Peugeot Expert is unusually good or bad.

  • 25% fail on Suspension
    • 12% fail on Suspension arms (130% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 6.1% fail on Ball joint (110% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 3.2% fail on Pins and bushes (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 3.2% fail on Ball joint dust cover (130% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.58% fail on Suspension arm
    • 7.5% fail on Component mounting prescribed areas
    • 6.1% fail on Sub-frames (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.6% fail on Sub-frame (13 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 2.3% fail on Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas
      • 1.4% fail on Pins and bushes (27 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 2.0% fail on Other suspension component
      • 1.2% fail on Pins and bushes (21 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Other suspension component
      • 0.29% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.29% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.29% fail on Ball joint dust cover
    • 1.4% fail on Springs
      • 1.4% fail on Coil springs
        • 0.86% fail on Coil spring
        • 0.58% fail on Mounting (14 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.2% fail on Axles (6 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.2% fail on Swivel pins and bushes (19 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.2% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 1.2% fail on Shock absorbers
    • 0.86% fail on Macpherson strut (4 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.29% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.29% fail on Ball joint
    • 0.58% fail on Suspension rods (9 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.58% fail on Suspension rod (23 times worse than other 2000 vans)
  • 21% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 4.9% fail on Position lamps
      • 4.9% fail on Position lamp
    • 4.6% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 3.7% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.86% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 4.0% fail on Headlamps
      • 3.7% fail on Headlamp
      • 0.29% fail on Headlamp levelling device
    • 3.7% fail on Stop lamp
    • 3.5% fail on Direction indicators
      • 3.5% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.6% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.86% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.29% fail on All direction indicators
    • 2.6% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 2.0% fail on Front and rear fog lamps
      • 2.0% fail on Rear fog lamp
        • 2.0% fail on Rear fog lamp
    • 2.0% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 1.2% fail on Battery(ies)
      • 0.86% fail on Horn
    • 0.29% fail on Outline marker lamps
      • 0.29% fail on Outline marker lamp
    • 0.29% fail on Hazard warning
      • 0.29% fail on Switch
    • 0.29% fail on Rear reflectors
    • 0.29% fail on Mandatory tell-tales
      • 0.29% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale
  • 20% fail on Body, chassis, structure
    • 7.5% fail on Exhaust system (76% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 6.3% fail on Transmission
      • 6.1% fail on Drive shafts (86% worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 6.1% fail on Joints (90% worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.29% fail on Joints
    • 2.9% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 2.3% fail on Integral vehicle structure condition
      • 0.86% fail on Sub-frame (12 times worse than other 2000 vans)
        • 0.86% fail on Sub-frame condition (13 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 2.0% fail on Chassis
      • 2.0% fail on Chassis condition
    • 1.4% fail on Towbar (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 1.4% fail on Vehicle structure (3 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Towbar condition
    • 1.2% fail on Body
      • 0.86% fail on Other body component
      • 0.29% fail on Panel
    • 0.86% fail on Seats
      • 0.58% fail on Passenger's seat
      • 0.29% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.29% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.29% fail on System
    • 0.29% fail on Engine mounting
      • 0.29% fail on Engine mounting condition
    • 0.29% fail on Doors
      • 0.29% fail on Other passenger's door
        • 0.29% fail on Door condition
    • 0.29% fail on Floor
    • 0.29% fail on Cabs
      • 0.29% fail on Prescribed areas
  • 14% fail on Brakes
    • 8.1% fail on Brake performance
      • 5.2% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 5.2% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 4.3% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 1.2% fail on Service brake performance
      • 3.2% fail on Service brake performance
        • 3.2% fail on Rbt
          • 2.6% fail on Service brake performance
          • 0.58% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 1.7% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (63% better than other 2000 vans)
        • 1.7% fail on Rbt (sp) (62% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 2.9% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 1.2% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 1.2% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.2% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.2% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.58% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.29% fail on Rod
        • 0.29% fail on Cable
    • 2.3% fail on Load sensing valves
    • 2.0% fail on Flexible brake hoses (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.4% fail on Rigid brake pipes (70% better than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.2% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.86% fail on Reservoirs (10 times worse than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Valves
    • 0.58% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.58% fail on Pedal
    • 0.58% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.58% fail on Lever
  • 12% fail on Visibility
    • 6.3% fail on Wipers
    • 5.5% fail on Washers
    • 1.4% fail on View to rear
      • 1.4% fail on Mirrors
    • 0.58% fail on Driver's view
  • 8.6% fail on Tyres (69% worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 5.2% fail on Tread depth
    • 4.0% fail on Condition
  • 8.1% fail on Steering
    • 4.0% fail on Steering linkage components
      • 3.5% fail on Track rod end
      • 0.58% fail on Ball joint
    • 3.2% fail on Steering gear
      • 3.2% fail on Steering rack
    • 1.2% fail on Power steering
      • 0.86% fail on Operation
      • 0.29% fail on Other components
    • 0.29% fail on Steering wheel
  • 4.3% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 3.5% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 3.2% fail on Compression ignition
        • 1.4% fail on Emissions not tested
        • 0.86% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Non turbo
        • 0.58% fail on Pre 01/07/2008 Turbo
        • 0.29% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
      • 0.58% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.58% fail on Catalyst emissions
    • 1.2% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.58% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.29% fail on Hydraulic fluid leaks
      • 0.29% fail on Other leaks
  • 3.5% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
    • 2.0% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp (2 times worse than other 2000 vans)
    • 1.7% fail on Seat belts
      • 1.2% fail on Condition
      • 0.58% fail on Prescribed areas (83% better than other 2000 vans)
      • 0.29% fail on Requirements
  • 1.7% fail on Identification of the vehicle
    • 1.7% fail on Registration plates
  • 0.29% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.29% fail on Condition