Fiat 500 2009: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 54 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2009 Fiat 500 were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test).

Summary

The 2009 Fiat 500 follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 17,049 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
54 in every 100
Did not pass first time
46 in every 1007,857 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
16 yearsabout 83,297 miles
First tests counted
17,049

What failed most often

  1. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)22 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Shock absorbers (front)11 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Suspension arm pins and bushes (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 Fiat 500 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

Four faults. The strongest is the shock absorbers (front): 5.7 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 7,744 of 7,857 failed first attempts (98.6%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025. Mileage is needed to compare like with like.

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.

Shock absorbers (front)

Failed on 854 first tests5.7 times as often as similar carsStrong evidence

What it means

Slight seepage that leaves a film of fluid on a shock absorber does not fail it. Severe leakage, or damage so that it does not function, is Major. A shock absorber missing or likely to become detached is graded Dangerous, though a missing one is only rejected if shock absorbers were fitted as standard.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 809 first tests, 3.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Macpherson strut (front)

Failed on 174 first tests3.7 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Many MacPherson strut top bushes are designed to have significant lateral play when the suspension hangs free, so a top bush is rejected only when the play comes from wear or maladjustment. A top bush or bearing with excessive wear or free play is Major. Rubber or synthetic bushes are rejected only for serious deterioration of the bonding or flexible material.

Shock absorbers (rear)

Failed on 477 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Slight seepage that leaves a film of fluid on a shock absorber does not fail it. Severe leakage, or damage so that it does not function, is Major. A shock absorber missing or likely to become detached is graded Dangerous, though a missing one is only rejected if shock absorbers were fitted as standard.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 543 first tests, 2.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 722 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Pins and bushes on suspension arms fail as Major when they are excessively worn. They are graded Dangerous when likely to become detached. DVSA uses the same wording for a suspension joint.

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

Brakes

Four faults and one wear pattern. The strongest is the handbrake performance (roller test, rear): 4.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 351 first tests4.9 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)

Failed on 1,674 first tests3.9 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.

Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear)

Failed on 312 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A wheel giving less than a set share of the maximum effort from the other wheel on the same axle is Major. On a steered axle, less than half is graded Dangerous. Testers disregard an imbalance if the lower effort is the result of a locked wheel, or if the higher effort from a wheel is at or below a low set figure.

Handbrake lever

Failed on 165 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A parking brake lever pivot or ratchet mechanism that is obviously worn is graded Minor. It is Major when worn to the extent that the brake may inadvertently release, and also when the ratchet is not holding correctly. A lever must have obvious excessive travel before being rejected.

Brake pads (front)

Failed on 394 first tests2.0 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.

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

Body and structure

One fault: exhaust system (front), 3.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Exhaust system (front)

Failed on 260 first tests3.1 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 599 first tests, 3.9 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.

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.

Coil spring mounting (rear)

Noted on 89 first tests8.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Macpherson strut bracket and mounting (front)

Noted on 111 first tests7.7 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Brake cable (rear)

Noted on 52 first tests6.2 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Suspension spring mounting area (rear)

Noted on 74 first tests4.9 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Macpherson strut pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 311 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Transmission oil leaks (front)

Noted on 277 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Handbrake efficiency on trikes, quads and pre-1968 vehicles (roller test)

Noted on 33 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
7in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
39in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 53.9% of 17,049 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 60.6%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 7 fixed and the 39 not fixed make the 46 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsTypical mileagePassed first time, as testedPassed first time, same mileage
Petrol16,32282,710 miles5454
Diesel72495,910 miles4950

Figures are in every 100 first tests. Cars with more miles usually fail more often, so the same-mileage figure gives every fuel the mileage mix of all the cars in this year.

Same model, other years

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

406080100200920152020Newer cars
40608010020092020Newer cars

Newer cars are younger, so look for a jump rather than the climb.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200854 in every 1009,416
2009 This car54 in every 10017,049
201056 in every 10018,066
201158 in every 10017,228
201261 in every 10024,878
201363 in every 10030,615
201463 in every 10036,521
201564 in every 10035,180
201669 in every 10029,936
201773 in every 10021,710
201877 in every 10022,658
201980 in every 10020,201
202085 in every 10012,402
202187 in every 10011,474
202290 in every 10011,039

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 Fiat 500.

Of 2009 Fiat 500 vehicles with under 59,000 miles, 64 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 107,000 miles or more, 48 in every 100 did.

Under 59,0003,405 tests
64
59,000–76,0003,322 tests
55
76,000–91,000 Typical car3,476 tests
51
91,000–107,0003,250 tests
51
107,000 and over3,386 tests
48

Petrol or diesel?

Typical mileagePassed first time,
as tested
Passed first time,
same mileage
Petrol82,710 miles5454
Diesel95,910 miles4950

Figures are in every 100 first tests. Petrol cars look better on the raw figures only because diesel cars have done more miles (typically 95,910 against 82,710). At the same mileage there is no clear difference between the two.


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 59,00076,000–91,000107,000 and over
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)4.410.913.4
Shock absorbers (front)5.35.24.9
Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)5.24.32.8
Headlight aim1.94.15.8
Headlight1.93.14.8

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


When a car fails

23in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

52in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

12in 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.

The 2009 Fiat 500 follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test), about 22 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 53.9% of 17,049 first MOTs on the 2009 Fiat 500 passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 60.6%. Among 7,857 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Shock absorbers (front) appears more often than on similar cars (11.0% of those tests; 854 observed failures; about 5.7× 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 Fiat 500 at the first attempt were Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (21.6%), Shock absorbers (front) (11.0%) and Suspension arm pins and bushes (front) (9.3%), 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: Shock absorbers (front) (11.0% of those tests; 854 observed failures; about 5.7× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Shock absorbers (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (11.0% of those tests; 854 observed failures; about 5.7× 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 Fiat 500 include Shock absorbers (front), Handbrake performance (roller test, rear), Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test). 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 Fiat 500 (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