FIAT Punto MOT Results
Registered in 201678.4% pass rate
from 1,743 tests in 2021
(30% worse than other 2016 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 2016 cars and highlighted areas where the FIAT Punto is unusually good or bad.
-
9.3% fail on
Visibility
(130% worse than other 2016 cars)
- 8.0% fail on Wipers (180% worse than other 2016 cars)
- 1.7% fail on Washers
-
0.057% fail on
Condition of glass
- 0.057% fail on Windscreen
-
0.057% fail on
View to rear
- 0.057% fail on Mirrors
-
7.1% fail on
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment
(100% worse than other 2016 cars)
- 3.2% fail on Stop lamp (4 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
2.2% fail on
Headlamps
(2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 2.2% fail on Headlamp (2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
1.8% fail on
Headlamp aim
- 1.7% fail on Headlamp aim
- 0.23% fail on Headlamp aim not tested
- 0.63% fail on Registration plate lamp(s)
-
0.46% fail on
Direction indicators
-
0.46% fail on
Flashing type
- 0.34% fail on Individual direction indicators (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.11% fail on Side repeaters
-
0.46% fail on
Flashing type
-
0.23% fail on
Front and rear fog lamps
-
0.23% fail on
Rear fog lamp
- 0.23% fail on Rear fog lamp
-
0.23% fail on
Rear fog lamp
-
0.057% fail on
Reversing lamps
- 0.057% fail on Reversing lamps
-
2.9% fail on
Tyres
- 1.5% fail on Condition
- 1.5% fail on Tread depth
-
2.6% fail on
Brakes
-
1.1% fail on
Brake performance
-
0.80% fail on
Parking brake efficiency (sp)
(2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.80% fail on Rbt (sp) (2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.40% fail on
Parking brake performance
(3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.40% fail on
Rbt
(3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.29% fail on Parking brake performance (2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.11% fail on Parking (secondary brake performance) (11 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.40% fail on
Rbt
(3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.34% fail on
Service brake performance
-
0.34% fail on
Rbt
- 0.23% fail on Service brake imbalance
- 0.11% fail on Service brake performance
-
0.34% fail on
Rbt
-
0.11% fail on
Service Brake Efficiency (sp)
-
0.11% fail on
Rbt (sp)
- 0.057% fail on Service brake performance
- 0.057% fail on Service brake imbalance
-
0.11% fail on
Rbt (sp)
-
0.80% fail on
Parking brake efficiency (sp)
(2 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
1.0% fail on
Mechanical brake components
(46% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.69% fail on
Brake linings and pads
(57% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.69% fail on Brake pads (56% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.34% fail on
Brake discs and drums
- 0.34% fail on Brake discs
-
0.057% fail on
Brake cables, rods, levers and linkages
- 0.057% fail on Cable
-
0.69% fail on
Brake linings and pads
(57% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.34% fail on
ABS / EBS / ESC
(3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.23% fail on Electronic stability control (3 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.17% fail on Anti-lock braking system
-
0.11% fail on
Service brake pedal or hand lever
- 0.057% fail on Pedal
- 0.057% fail on Hand lever
-
0.11% fail on
Parking brake control
- 0.11% fail on Lever
-
0.057% fail on
Brake actuators (including spring brakes or hydraulic cylinders)
- 0.057% fail on Hydraulic brake cylinder
-
1.1% fail on
Brake performance
-
1.1% fail on
Suspension
(45% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.52% fail on
Springs
(55% better than other 2016 cars)
-
0.52% fail on
Coil springs
(55% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.52% fail on Coil spring
-
0.52% fail on
Coil springs
(55% better than other 2016 cars)
- 0.23% fail on Shock absorbers
-
0.17% fail on
Suspension arms
- 0.11% fail on Ball joint
- 0.057% fail on Attachment bracket and mounting
- 0.057% fail on Wheel bearings
-
0.057% fail on
Suspension rods
- 0.057% fail on Ball joint dust cover
-
0.057% fail on
Anti-roll bars
- 0.057% fail on Anti-roll bar
-
0.057% fail on
Sub-frames
- 0.057% fail on Sub-frame
-
0.52% fail on
Springs
(55% better than other 2016 cars)
-
1.1% fail on
Noise, emissions and leaks
-
0.98% fail on
Exhaust emissions
-
0.92% fail on
Spark ignition
(95% worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.57% fail on Malfunction indicator lamp
- 0.40% fail on Catalyst emissions
-
0.057% fail on
Compression ignition
- 0.057% fail on Emissions not tested
-
0.92% fail on
Spark ignition
(95% worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.23% fail on
Fluid leaks
(6 times worse than other 2016 cars)
- 0.23% fail on Engine oil leaks (8 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.98% fail on
Exhaust emissions
-
0.75% fail on
Body, chassis, structure
- 0.34% fail on Exhaust system
-
0.17% fail on
Fuel system
- 0.17% fail on Fuel cap/sealing device (4 times worse than other 2016 cars)
-
0.11% fail on
Transmission
-
0.057% fail on
Drive shafts
- 0.057% fail on Joints
- 0.057% fail on Belts
-
0.057% fail on
Drive shafts
-
0.057% fail on
Doors
-
0.057% fail on
Other passenger's door
- 0.057% fail on Door condition
-
0.057% fail on
Other passenger's door
-
0.057% fail on
Boot lid
- 0.057% fail on Boot lid condition
-
0.23% fail on
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems
-
0.11% fail on
Seat belts
- 0.11% fail on Condition
- 0.11% fail on SRS malfunction indicator lamp
-
0.11% fail on
Seat belts
-
0.11% fail on
Identification of the vehicle
- 0.11% fail on Registration plates
-
0.11% fail on
Steering
-
0.11% fail on
Steering linkage components
- 0.11% fail on Track rod end
-
0.11% fail on
Steering linkage components
-
0.057% fail on
Seat belt installation check
- 0.057% fail on Belt(s)/padding
-
0.057% fail on
Road Wheels
- 0.057% fail on Attachment
Read the Honest John Review
-
Fiat Punto (2010 - 2018)
Low running costs. Economical engines. Reasonable levels of standard kit.