Citroen C4 Picasso MOT Results
Registered in 200955.9% pass rate
from 5,999 tests in 2017
(34% worse than other 2009 cars)
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 2009 cars and highlighted areas where the Citroen C4 Picasso is unusually good or bad.
-
30% fail on
Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment
(96% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
14% fail on
Position lamps
(2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 13% fail on Front lamps (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.63% fail on Rear lamps
- 0.083% fail on All position lamps
- 9.3% fail on Stop lamp (190% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 8.9% fail on Registration plate lamp (120% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 6.0% fail on Headlamp aim (48% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
4.8% fail on
Headlamps
(83% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 4.8% fail on Headlamp (88% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.033% fail on
Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest
- 0.033% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
-
0.017% fail on
Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
- 0.017% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
-
1.3% fail on
Direction indicators
-
1.3% fail on
Flashing type
- 1.0% fail on Individual lamps
- 0.22% fail on Side repeaters (60% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.10% fail on All direction indicators
- 0.017% fail on Tell tales
-
1.3% fail on
Flashing type
-
0.52% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.52% fail on Fog lamp
- 0.18% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
- 0.050% fail on Battery (73% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.050% fail on Electrical wiring
- 0.050% fail on Rear reflectors
- 0.050% fail on Horn (78% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.033% fail on
Hazard warning
- 0.033% fail on Lamp
-
14% fail on
Position lamps
(2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
12% fail on
Suspension
(11% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
6.6% fail on
Drive shafts
(5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
6.5% fail on
Front drive shafts
(5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 6.5% fail on Constant velocity joints (5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.017% fail on Couplings
- 0.017% fail on Drive shafts
-
0.10% fail on
Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
(6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.10% fail on Drive shafts (6 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
6.5% fail on
Front drive shafts
(5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
3.2% fail on
Coil springs
(23% better than other 2009 cars)
- 3.2% fail on Condition (22% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.017% fail on Location
-
1.5% fail on
Anti-roll bars
(43% better than other 2009 cars)
- 1.2% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (43% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.25% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
- 0.033% fail on Linkage condition
- 0.017% fail on Attachment
-
0.87% fail on
Suspension arms
(53% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.85% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (53% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.033% fail on Attachment
- 0.77% fail on Front suspension joints (52% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.65% fail on
Shock absorbers
(44% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.65% fail on Condition (44% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.20% fail on
Wheel bearings
(57% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.17% fail on Rear
- 0.033% fail on Front (86% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.10% fail on
Macpherson strut
- 0.10% fail on Condition
-
0.050% fail on
Air suspension
(10 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.033% fail on Operation (19 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.017% fail on Suspension unit
-
0.017% fail on
Tie bars/rods
- 0.017% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
-
6.6% fail on
Drive shafts
(5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
9.0% fail on
Brakes
(38% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
4.9% fail on
Hub components
(75% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 4.2% fail on Brake pads (81% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 1.1% fail on Brake discs (80% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.10% fail on Brake calipers
- 0.067% fail on Brake linings (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
3.7% fail on
Brake performance
(27% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 2.3% fail on Parking brake performance (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 1.4% fail on Rear wheels
- 0.70% fail on Front wheels
- 0.13% fail on Brake imbalance
- 0.083% fail on Service brake performance
- 0.083% fail on Brake performance not tested
-
0.58% fail on
Hydraulic systems
-
0.38% fail on
Components
(41% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.22% fail on Hoses
- 0.17% fail on Pipes (66% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.017% fail on Reservoirs
- 0.17% fail on Leaks (130% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.033% fail on Operation
-
0.38% fail on
Components
(41% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.48% fail on
Parking brake
- 0.40% fail on Electronic parking brake (11 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.083% fail on Condition (79% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.30% fail on
Service brake control components
(2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.30% fail on
Pedal
(2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.30% fail on Anti-slip (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.30% fail on
Pedal
(2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.22% fail on ABS
- 0.20% fail on Electronic stability system (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.15% fail on
Mechanical components
(2 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.12% fail on Cable (180% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.033% fail on Lever (7 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.033% fail on Restricted movement
-
4.9% fail on
Hub components
(75% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
8.6% fail on
Tyres
(19% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 5.9% fail on Tread depth (54% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 2.9% fail on Condition (18% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.10% fail on Valve stem
- 0.067% fail on Size/type
-
7.7% fail on
Driver's view of the road
(46% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 3.9% fail on Wipers (37% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 3.6% fail on Washers (69% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.33% fail on Windscreen
- 0.23% fail on Mirrors
-
1.2% fail on
Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions
(38% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.62% fail on Emissions
-
0.27% fail on
Fuel system
- 0.20% fail on System (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.067% fail on Tank (5 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.23% fail on Exhaust system (82% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.17% fail on Emissions not tested
-
0.97% fail on
Body, Structure and General Items
(120% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.48% fail on
Seats
(4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.28% fail on Drivers (3 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.20% fail on Passengers (4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.25% fail on Body condition (110% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.18% fail on
Doors
- 0.18% fail on Passengers other (160% worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.050% fail on
Load security
- 0.033% fail on Tailgate (10 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.017% fail on Access panel
- 0.033% fail on Body security
-
0.48% fail on
Seats
(4 times worse than other 2009 cars)
-
0.58% fail on
Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
-
0.37% fail on
Supplementary restraint systems
- 0.35% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
- 0.017% fail on Drivers airbag
-
0.22% fail on
Seat belts
- 0.18% fail on Condition
- 0.017% fail on Requirements
- 0.017% fail on Attachment
-
0.37% fail on
Supplementary restraint systems
-
0.47% fail on
Road Wheels
- 0.43% fail on Attachment (99% worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.017% fail on Halfshafts
- 0.017% fail on Condition
-
0.47% fail on
Registration plates and VIN
- 0.47% fail on Registration plate
-
0.42% fail on
Steering
(65% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.37% fail on
Steering system
(66% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.22% fail on Track rod end (72% better than other 2009 cars)
- 0.083% fail on Ball joint
- 0.067% fail on Steering rack
- 0.050% fail on Steering operation
-
0.37% fail on
Steering system
(66% better than other 2009 cars)
-
0.033% fail on
Towbars
(10 times worse than other 2009 cars)
- 0.033% fail on Towbar (12 times worse than other 2009 cars)