MOT Results

Honest John Vans MOT Results » Vauxhall » Corsavan » 2010

Vauxhall Corsavan MOT Results

Registered in 2010
52.7% pass rate
from 716 tests in 2021
Pass rate by mileage
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 2010 vans and highlighted areas where the Vauxhall Corsavan is unusually good or bad.

  • 21% fail on Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
    • 6.1% fail on Headlamps (72% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 5.9% fail on Headlamp (75% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.42% fail on Headlamp levelling device
      • 0.14% fail on Matched pair
    • 6.1% fail on Stop lamp
    • 3.9% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
    • 3.5% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 2.9% fail on Headlamp aim
      • 0.56% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
    • 2.5% fail on Direction indicators
      • 2.5% fail on Flashing type
        • 2.1% fail on Individual direction indicators
        • 0.56% fail on Side repeaters
        • 0.14% fail on All direction indicators
    • 0.84% fail on Electrical equipment
      • 0.70% fail on Horn
      • 0.14% fail on Battery(ies)
    • 0.56% fail on Front and rear fog lamps (75% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.56% fail on Rear fog lamp (75% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.56% fail on Rear fog lamp (75% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.56% fail on Reversing lamps
      • 0.56% fail on Reversing lamps
    • 0.28% fail on Position lamps
      • 0.28% fail on Position lamp
    • 0.28% fail on Mandatory tell-tales (5 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.28% fail on Rear fog lamp tell-tale (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
  • 18% fail on Suspension
    • 12% fail on Springs (150% worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 12% fail on Coil springs (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 12% fail on Coil spring (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.14% fail on Mounting
    • 2.2% fail on Shock absorbers (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 2.0% fail on Anti-roll bars (68% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.84% fail on Linkage ball joints (64% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.56% fail on Linkage ball joint dust cover
      • 0.42% fail on Ball joint dust cover
      • 0.28% fail on Ball joint
      • 0.14% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
    • 1.7% fail on Suspension arms (71% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.98% fail on Pins and bushes
      • 0.56% fail on Ball joint (81% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.28% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting (14 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.4% fail on Sub-frames (6 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.3% fail on Sub-frame (19 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.14% fail on Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas
    • 1.1% fail on Wheel bearings
    • 1.1% fail on Macpherson strut (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.70% fail on Pins and bushes (4 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.28% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
      • 0.14% fail on Macpherson strut
    • 0.14% fail on Suspension rods
      • 0.14% fail on Pins and bushes
  • 9.4% fail on Brakes (36% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 4.9% fail on Brake performance (37% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 3.5% fail on Service brake performance
        • 3.5% fail on Rbt
          • 2.4% fail on Service brake performance
          • 1.3% fail on Service brake imbalance
      • 1.4% fail on Parking brake efficiency (sp) (73% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 1.4% fail on Rbt (sp) (73% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.3% fail on Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
        • 1.3% fail on Rbt (sp)
          • 0.98% fail on Service brake imbalance
          • 0.42% fail on Service brake performance
      • 1.1% fail on Parking brake performance
        • 1.1% fail on Rbt
          • 1.1% fail on Parking brake performance
      • 0.14% fail on Brake performance not tested
    • 3.5% fail on Mechanical brake components
      • 2.9% fail on Brake linings and pads
        • 2.9% fail on Brake pads
      • 1.4% fail on Brake discs and drums
        • 1.4% fail on Brake discs
      • 0.14% fail on Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
        • 0.14% fail on Cable
    • 0.98% fail on Service brake pedal or hand lever
      • 0.98% fail on Pedal
    • 0.42% fail on Parking brake control
      • 0.42% fail on Lever
    • 0.42% fail on Rigid brake pipes (89% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.42% fail on Flexible brake hoses
    • 0.42% fail on ABS / EBS / ESC
      • 0.42% fail on Anti-lock braking system
    • 0.14% fail on Hydraulic systems
      • 0.14% fail on Brake fluid
    • 0.14% fail on Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
      • 0.14% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder
  • 8.7% fail on Visibility
    • 5.6% fail on Washers
    • 3.4% fail on Wipers
    • 0.14% fail on Bonnet
    • 0.14% fail on Condition of glass
      • 0.14% fail on Windscreen
    • 0.14% fail on View to rear
      • 0.14% fail on Mirrors
  • 7.8% fail on Tyres
    • 5.3% fail on Tread depth
    • 2.5% fail on Condition
    • 0.56% fail on Size/type
  • 6.4% fail on Noise, emissions and leaks
    • 5.9% fail on Exhaust emissions
      • 5.3% fail on Compression ignition
        • 3.4% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
        • 1.1% fail on On or after 01/07/2008
        • 0.84% fail on Emissions not tested
        • 0.14% fail on Emission control equipment
          • 0.14% fail on Other emission control equipment
      • 0.70% fail on Spark ignition
        • 0.70% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
    • 0.98% fail on Fluid leaks
      • 0.84% fail on Engine oil leaks
      • 0.14% fail on Transmission oil leaks
  • 5.3% fail on Body, chassis, structure (33% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.8% fail on Exhaust system
    • 1.1% fail on Transmission (72% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.98% fail on Drive shafts (72% better than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.98% fail on Joints (71% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.14% fail on Prop shafts
        • 0.14% fail on Joints
    • 0.98% fail on Doors
      • 0.70% fail on Front passenger's door (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
        • 0.70% fail on Door condition (2 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.28% fail on Driver's door
        • 0.14% fail on Door condition
        • 0.14% fail on Catch
    • 0.70% fail on Fuel system
      • 0.28% fail on Pipe
      • 0.28% fail on System (13 times worse than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.14% fail on Hose
    • 0.42% fail on Bumpers
    • 0.28% fail on Engine mounting
      • 0.28% fail on Engine mounting condition
    • 0.14% fail on Integral vehicle structure
      • 0.14% fail on Sub-frame
        • 0.14% fail on Sub-frame condition
    • 0.14% fail on Spare wheel
      • 0.14% fail on Spare wheel condition
      • 0.14% fail on Carrier
    • 0.14% fail on Seats
      • 0.14% fail on Driver's seat
    • 0.14% fail on Undertray
  • 1.8% fail on Steering (66% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.4% fail on Steering linkage components (68% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 1.3% fail on Track rod end (69% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.14% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.14% fail on Other components
        • 0.14% fail on Steering linkage
    • 0.28% fail on Steering wheel (11 times worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.28% fail on Steering play
      • 0.28% fail on Steering rack
  • 1.5% fail on Identification of the vehicle (130% worse than other 2010 vans)
    • 1.5% fail on Registration plates (130% worse than other 2010 vans)
  • 0.70% fail on Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (71% better than other 2010 vans)
    • 0.42% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
    • 0.28% fail on Seat belts (82% better than other 2010 vans)
      • 0.28% fail on Condition
  • 0.28% fail on Road Wheels
    • 0.28% fail on Attachment
  • 0.14% fail on Speedometer and speed limiter
    • 0.14% fail on Speed limiter
      • 0.14% fail on Speed limiter plate