MOT Results

Honest John Good Garage Guide MOT Results » Volkswagen » Polo » 2010

Volkswagen Polo MOT Results

Registered in 2010
68.4% pass rate
from 35,889 tests in 2017
(8.5% worse than other 2010 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 2010 cars and highlighted areas where the Volkswagen Polo is unusually good or bad.

  • 19% fail on Lamps, Reflectors and Electrical Equipment (41% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 11% fail on Registration plate lamp (200% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.5% fail on Headlamp aim (30% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.5% fail on Headlamps (56% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 3.5% fail on Headlamp (61% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.014% fail on Headlamp defects which do require an aim check on retest
        • 0.0056% fail on Headlamp levelling device
        • 0.0056% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
        • 0.0028% fail on Headlamp cleaning device
      • 0.011% fail on Switch
      • 0.0056% fail on Headlamp defects which don't require an aim check on retest (91% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0056% fail on Main beam 'tell-tale'
      • 0.0056% fail on Dipswitch
      • 0.0028% fail on Matched pair
    • 2.5% fail on Position lamps (15% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Front lamps (29% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.85% fail on Rear lamps (46% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.025% fail on All position lamps
      • 0.0056% fail on Switch
    • 0.84% fail on Direction indicators (45% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.83% fail on Flashing type (45% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.73% fail on Side repeaters (35% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.070% fail on Individual lamps (92% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.022% fail on Tell tales (190% worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0084% fail on All direction indicators (94% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0056% fail on Semaphore (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0056% fail on Tell tales (12 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.45% fail on Stop lamp (82% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.15% fail on Headlamp aim not tested (65% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Rear fog lamp (62% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on Fog lamp (61% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0084% fail on Tell tale
      • 0.0028% fail on Switch
    • 0.13% fail on Horn
    • 0.12% fail on Battery
    • 0.0084% fail on Electrical wiring
    • 0.0056% fail on Hazard warning (85% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0028% fail on Lamp
      • 0.0028% fail on Tell tale
    • 0.0028% fail on Rear reflectors
  • 8.5% fail on Suspension (5.0% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 4.6% fail on Shock absorbers (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 4.6% fail on Condition (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.3% fail on Anti-roll bars (47% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.0% fail on Linkage pins/bushes/ball joints (57% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.29% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.045% fail on Linkage condition
      • 0.011% fail on Attachment
      • 0.0056% fail on Condition
    • 1.3% fail on Coil springs (61% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.2% fail on Condition (63% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.056% fail on Location (83% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.35% fail on Wheel bearings
      • 0.19% fail on Rear
      • 0.16% fail on Front
    • 0.30% fail on Drive shafts (60% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.30% fail on Front drive shafts (59% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.30% fail on Constant velocity joints (60% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.0056% fail on Couplings
      • 0.0028% fail on Any drive shaft which is part of the suspension
        • 0.0028% fail on Drive shafts
    • 0.24% fail on Suspension arms (81% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.23% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints (82% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0084% fail on Attachment
      • 0.0028% fail on Condition
    • 0.098% fail on Macpherson strut
      • 0.098% fail on Condition
    • 0.059% fail on Tie bars/rods
      • 0.056% fail on Pins/bushes/ball joints
      • 0.0028% fail on Attachment
    • 0.050% fail on Front suspension joints (86% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.039% fail on Fluid suspension (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.039% fail on Suspension unit (4 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.0056% fail on Sub-frames (82% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0056% fail on Attachment
    • 0.0056% fail on Prescribed areas
      • 0.0028% fail on Component mounting
      • 0.0028% fail on Subframe mounting
    • 0.0028% fail on Front suspension retaining and locking devices
  • 6.2% fail on Brakes (11% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 3.7% fail on Brake performance (70% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 2.1% fail on Rear wheels (100% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.7% fail on Parking brake performance (130% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.78% fail on Front wheels (21% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Brake imbalance
      • 0.12% fail on Service brake performance (51% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.017% fail on Brake performance not tested
      • 0.011% fail on Brake operation
      • 0.0028% fail on Parking brake operation
    • 1.6% fail on Hub components (41% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.4% fail on Brake pads (42% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.35% fail on Brake discs (36% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.022% fail on Brake calipers
      • 0.020% fail on Wheel cylinder (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0056% fail on Brake drums
      • 0.0028% fail on Brake linings
      • 0.0028% fail on Brake back plates
    • 1.6% fail on Parking brake (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 1.6% fail on Condition (3 times worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.24% fail on Restricted movement (120% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.20% fail on Hydraulic systems (63% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.11% fail on Components (75% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.036% fail on Hoses (64% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.031% fail on Reservoirs
        • 0.028% fail on Pipes (91% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.014% fail on Cylinders (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.081% fail on Leaks (65% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.025% fail on Brake fluid warning lamp
      • 0.011% fail on Operation (71% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.13% fail on Electronic stability system (76% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.084% fail on ABS (58% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.017% fail on Service brake control components (84% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.017% fail on Pedal (84% better than other 2010 cars)
        • 0.011% fail on Condition
        • 0.0056% fail on Anti-slip (93% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.011% fail on Mechanical components
      • 0.0056% fail on Linkage (7 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0056% fail on Lever
    • 0.0028% fail on Air and vacuum systems
      • 0.0028% fail on Components
        • 0.0028% fail on Reservoirs
  • 5.6% fail on Tyres (18% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.9% fail on Tread depth (17% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.6% fail on Condition (22% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.16% fail on Tyre pressure monitoring system
    • 0.13% fail on Size/type
    • 0.067% fail on Valve stem
  • 3.9% fail on Driver's view of the road (19% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 2.1% fail on Wipers (19% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.4% fail on Washers (24% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.43% fail on Windscreen (34% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.059% fail on Mirrors (50% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.033% fail on Bonnet (63% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.0056% fail on Indirect vision devices
  • 2.5% fail on Exhaust, Fuel and Emissions (80% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 1.6% fail on Exhaust system (75% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.60% fail on Fuel system (190% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.45% fail on Cap (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.14% fail on System (140% worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.0028% fail on Hose
    • 0.50% fail on Emissions (64% worse than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.14% fail on Emissions not tested (49% worse than other 2010 cars)
  • 0.60% fail on Seat Belts and Supplementary Restraint Systems
    • 0.30% fail on Seat belts
      • 0.23% fail on Condition
      • 0.036% fail on Prescribed areas (5 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.022% fail on Attachment
      • 0.011% fail on Requirements
      • 0.0056% fail on Installation check
        • 0.0028% fail on Anchorage's
        • 0.0028% fail on Belt(s)/padding
    • 0.30% fail on Supplementary restraint systems
      • 0.28% fail on SRS Malfunction Indicator Lamp
      • 0.014% fail on Drivers airbag
  • 0.43% fail on Steering (58% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.38% fail on Steering system (58% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.20% fail on Track rod end (71% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.059% fail on Steering arm (2 times worse than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.036% fail on Free play
        • 0.036% fail on Steering rack
      • 0.031% fail on Ball joint (54% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.028% fail on Steering rack (78% better than other 2010 cars)
      • 0.017% fail on Drag link end
      • 0.014% fail on Other components
        • 0.0084% fail on Steering pivot point
        • 0.0056% fail on Steering component
    • 0.039% fail on Power steering
      • 0.017% fail on Electronic power steering
      • 0.011% fail on Other components
      • 0.0056% fail on Operation
      • 0.0028% fail on Pipes and hoses
      • 0.0028% fail on Pump
    • 0.0084% fail on Steering operation
    • 0.0028% fail on Steering control
      • 0.0028% fail on Steering wheel
  • 0.40% fail on Registration plates and VIN
    • 0.40% fail on Registration plate
  • 0.31% fail on Body, Structure and General Items
    • 0.12% fail on Doors
      • 0.059% fail on Passengers other
      • 0.036% fail on Passengers front
      • 0.025% fail on Drivers
    • 0.11% fail on Body condition
    • 0.047% fail on Seats
      • 0.033% fail on Drivers
      • 0.014% fail on Passengers
    • 0.011% fail on Vehicle structure
      • 0.011% fail on Chassis
    • 0.011% fail on Load security
      • 0.0056% fail on Access panel
      • 0.0056% fail on Bootlid
    • 0.0084% fail on Engine mountings
    • 0.0028% fail on Body security
  • 0.21% fail on Road Wheels (31% better than other 2010 cars)
    • 0.15% fail on Attachment
    • 0.056% fail on Condition (49% better than other 2010 cars)
Read the Honest John Review

  • Volkswagen Polo GTI (2010 - 2018)
    Vastly improved from 2015. Snappy manual gearbox. Fun handling. Easy to live with. Three or five-door.
  • Volkswagen Polo (2009 - 2017)
    Neatly styled and easy to drive. Room for five. Most come with full size spare. High quality interior. Double folding rear seats give flat load area. Frugal 1.2 TDI BlueMotion.

    Search Good Garages