Model Reports 5 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Alfa Romeo Mito 2009: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 54 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test).

Summary

A 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito passed first time about 4 in every 100 less often than the 2010 model year next to it.

At a glance

How 2,741 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
54 in every 100
Did not pass first time
46 in every 1001,252 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
16 yearsabout 96,225 miles
First tests counted
2,741

What failed most often

  1. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)20 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Coil spring (front)14 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Tyre condition (front)9 in every 100 failed tests

How we count this. Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Only Class 4 cars on their first MOT of the year are counted. A car that fails and is fixed at the test station still counts as a fail in the first-attempt rate. These are raw results, not adjusted for age, mileage, or peer mix. The MOT does not test engine or gearbox internals.

Note:

These are patterns across 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito vehicles in 2025, not a prediction that any one car will have them. Faults are grouped by part of the car. A wear pattern follows age and use more than the way the car was built. They come from MOT defect codes, not manufacturer bulletins, recalls or a diagnosis of any one car.

Suspension

Three faults. The strongest is the suspension sub-frame (front): 9.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 1,252 failed first attempts in 2025 that had a mileage recorded, which allows a like-for-like comparison.

We only list faults with at least 20 failures and a rate of about 2.0 times that of similar cars, which keeps one-off results out of the list.

Suspension sub-frame (front)

Failed on 76 first tests9.4 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A suspension sub-frame insecurely attached to the chassis or axle is Major, and Dangerous when it is insecure and impairing directional stability. A sub-frame that is missing, likely to become detached, fractured or likely to fail is also Dangerous. Excessive damage or corrosion that seriously weakens it is Major.

Wheel bearings (rear)

Failed on 42 first tests4.2 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Excessive play in a wheel bearing, or a bearing that is excessively rough, is Major. Play so excessive that the bearing is likely to break up or directional control is impaired is Dangerous, and so is a bearing so rough that it is likely to overheat or break up.

Coil spring (front)

Failed on 181 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A missing bump stop rubber is not a reason to fail a coil spring. When the vehicle is jacked and lowered, a spring that does not correctly locate as the suspension returns to its normal running position is rejected as insecurely attached. A missing spring is Major, and graded Dangerous where directional control is affected.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: seat belt condition (rear), 3.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Seat belt condition (rear)

Failed on 36 first tests3.8 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Any sign of overstretching is a deficiency, and so is a cut anywhere on a child seat belt. On other belts the size of a cut decides it, with a stricter limit at the webbing edge than away from it. Webbing significantly stretched or weakened has rows in both Major and Dangerous grades.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

Brakes

Three faults and two wear patterns. The strongest is the brake performance not tested: 3.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake performance not tested

Failed on 27 first tests3.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A brake performance test recorded as unable to be tested is Major. DVSA says the result must only be used where it becomes apparent during the test that the item cannot be tested, and this could not have been identified before starting. The reason has to go in the additional information box.

Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)

Failed on 245 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A parking brake with efficiency below the minimum requirement is Major, and graded Dangerous where efficiency is less than half of the required value. On a roller brake tester, the requirement counts as met if more than half of the wheels of a brake system lock. The check applies only to vehicles whose parking brake was not already tested as the secondary brake.

Handbrake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 43 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A parking brake that is inoperative on one side is Major. When tested on the road, the failure is the vehicle deviating excessively from a straight line. Vehicles whose parking brake was already tested as the secondary brake are not tested again for this.

Brake pads (rear)

Failed on 76 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

A pad worn down to its wear indicator, or contaminated with oil or grease, is Major. A pad worn below the set thickness limit, missing or incorrectly mounted is Dangerous. The manual treats an illuminated brake wear indicator as no reason for failure, although DVSA also lists an illuminated indicator as a Major row.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 89 first tests, 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake discs (rear)

Failed on 31 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

A brake disc or drum must be significantly worn before it is rejected, and being worn below the manufacturer's recommended limits is not a reason in itself. Significantly and obviously worn is Major, as is contamination with oil or grease. A disc or drum that is fractured, insecure, seriously weakened or missing is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 177 first tests, 2.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Body and structure

One fault: exhaust system (front), 3.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Exhaust system (front)

Failed on 48 first tests3.4 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Exhaust fumes causing a danger to health of persons on board are graded Dangerous, and so is a silencer likely to become detached. Fumes entering the cabin are Major. One or more missing or defective mountings does not necessarily make the exhaust insecure, since testers assess the overall security of the system.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 78 first tests, 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Lamps and electrical

One fault and one wear pattern. The strongest is the headlight aim not tested: 2.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Headlight aim not tested

Failed on 22 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

Headlamp aim recorded as not tested, or unable to be tested, is a Major failure. These results must only be used where it becomes apparent during the test that the item cannot be tested, and this could not have been identified before starting. The reason must be included in the additional information box.

Rear fog light

Failed on 41 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A missing obligatory rear fog lamp, one that is not working, or one that does not emit a steady red light is graded Major. A rear fog lamp adversely affected by the operation of any other lamp is Major too. The manual allows it to go out when main beam is switched on or when dipped beam headlamps are switched off.

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

Advisories

Other things testers noted as worn or close to failing, more often than on similar cars.

An advisory is a note from the tester about something that has not failed yet. It is an early warning, not a fail. Advisories for the faults above are shown with those faults.

Transmission oil leaks

Noted on 53 first tests3.3 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm (front)

Noted on 76 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (rear)

Noted on 266 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Headlight

Noted on 32 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Data: UK MOT open data, 2025. Counts cover advisories recorded on failed first tests only, compared with cars of the same age and mileage.

MOT pass rates

How first tests ended, and how the pass rates are counted.

Passed first time
54in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
6in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
40in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 54.3% of 2,741 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 60.4%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 6 fixed and the 40 not fixed make the 46 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

Passed first time in every 100, all tested in 2025.

40608010020092015Newer cars
4060801002009Newer cars

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb. A year earlier (2024), when these cars were a year younger, 55 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
2009 This car54 in every 1002,741
201058 in every 1002,523
201158 in every 1002,298
201262 in every 1001,928
201360 in every 1001,460
201462 in every 1001,512
201561 in every 1001,436
201667 in every 1001,381
201768 in every 100692
201872 in every 100385

If you are buying one

What this year's MOT record means for the decision in front of you.

Mileage matters most on a 2009 Mito.

Of 2009 Mito vehicles with under 73,000 miles, 62 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 121,000 miles or more, 51 in every 100 did.

Under 73,000559 tests
62
73,000–89,000546 tests
55
89,000–104,000 Typical car549 tests
52
104,000–121,000533 tests
52
121,000 and over553 tests
51

What to check at your mileage

How often each fault turned up on a failed first test, by the car's mileage. Read it as: what is likely to need looking at on a car like the one in front of you.

Under 73,00089,000–104,000121,000 and over
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)4.710.411.4
Coil spring (front)5.46.46.7
Tyre condition (front)3.24.74.0
Petrol emissions (with catalyst)1.82.74.5
Headlight2.12.95.2

Faults per 100 first tests, by the car's mileage at the test.

When a car fails

29in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

47in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

13in every 100

of all first tests had a defect the tester marked dangerous (unsafe to drive away).

Every figure here is a first-attempt MOT rate from DVSA open data for this model line, for cars of this model year tested in 2025. Each mileage band holds a fifth of the tests. MOTs do not test engine or gearbox internals, so this is a pre-purchase checklist, not a full reliability score.

FAQs

Short answers about how to read this model-year guide.

A 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito passed first time about 4 in every 100 less often than the 2010 model year next to it. In 2025, 54.3% of 2,741 first MOTs on the 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 60.4%. Among 1,252 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Suspension sub-frame (front) appears more often than on similar cars (6.1% of those tests; 76 observed failures; about 9.4× more often than similar cars). There is no single reliability score here; this is a pre-purchase checklist built from DVSA open data, not a guarantee for any individual car.
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that most often failed a 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito at the first attempt were Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (19.6%), Coil spring (front) (14.5%) and Tyre condition (front) (8.7%), each as a share of the year's failed first attempts. That is what goes wrong most often on the car. The common faults table shows a different measure: faults that are unusual compared with similar cars.
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Suspension sub-frame (front) (6.1% of those tests; 76 observed failures; about 9.4× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Suspension sub-frame (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (6.1% of those tests; 76 observed failures; about 9.4× more often than similar cars). That does not prove a design fault. Age, mileage, and how the car was used still matter. Treat it as a pre-purchase checkpoint, not a manufacturer service bulletin.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito include Suspension sub-frame (front), Wheel bearings (rear), Seat belt condition (rear). These are the faults that stand out compared with similar cars, not a complete list of what can go wrong on any individual car.
Advisories flag issues noted at the test and are not a fail rate. We show advisory patterns that appear more often than on similar cars among failed first-attempt tests, separate from common failure rows. Use them as early-warning checks, not as a pass/fail score.
This page highlights MOT failure patterns for the 2009 Alfa Romeo Mito (registration year) using UK DVSA open data for the selected test year. Patterns are compared with cars of a similar age and mileage. It is a buyer checklist from MOT defect statistics, not a full service history or manufacturer service-bulletin list.
No. MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules. Patterns here come from MOT defect statistics only and should not be read as engine or gearbox reliability scores.

About this data

How this page is built and what it can (and can't) say.

These figures come from UK MOT open data for this model year. We surface common failure patterns against similar cars, not a full reliability score, and not a pass/fail verdict on any individual vehicle.

2024 2025

What we include

UK Class 4 cars only. Normal MOT tests (not retests); first test per vehicle per calendar year; results pass, PRS, or fail.

Same-day repairs

PRS means the car failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

How we compare

We compare this model year with other Class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year. This model family is left out of the peer group so the car is not measured against itself.

What this does not cover

  • MOTs do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronics; this is not a full reliability score.
  • Common faults come from MOT defect stats, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
  • Age and mileage matching reduces, but does not remove, differences in how cars were used and maintained.
  • If the data for a car is too thin to say anything useful, we say so rather than guess.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Check any vehicle’s MOT history

Full MOT history, mileage records, and reliability insights for any UK vehicle.

Run a free check