Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Fiat 500C 2010: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 54 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2010 Fiat 500C were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test).

Summary

The 2010 Fiat 500C follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,948 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
54 in every 100
Did not pass first time
46 in every 100895 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
15 yearsabout 75,292 miles
First tests counted
1,948

What failed most often

  1. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)15 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Shock absorbers (front)11 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)10 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 2010 Fiat 500C vehicles in 2025, not a prediction that any one car will have them. Faults are grouped by part of the car. 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): 4.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 872 of 895 failed first attempts (97.4%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025. Mileage is needed to compare like with like. 2.6% of failures are excluded because no mileage was recorded, so treat these shares as indicative for this model year.

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 97 first tests4.9 times as often as similar carsLikely 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 92 first tests, 2.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Macpherson strut (front)

Failed on 21 first tests3.7 times as often as similar carsPossible 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 77 first tests3.3 times as often as similar carsLikely 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 65 first tests, 2.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 89 first tests2.4 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

Three faults. The strongest is the handbrake performance (roller test, rear): 3.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 31 first tests3.5 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 133 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsPossible 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 24 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

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

Body and structure

One fault: exhaust system (front), 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Exhaust system (front)

Failed on 23 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible 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 52 first tests, 3.1 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.

Brake light

Noted on 27 first tests6.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Macpherson strut pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 42 first tests5.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Transmission oil leaks

Noted on 29 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (rear)

Noted on 153 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (front)

Noted on 52 first tests2.2 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 54.1% of 1,948 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 60.5%: 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.

Same model, other years

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

40608010020102015Older carsNewer cars
4060801002010Newer 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
200956 in every 1001,112
2010 This car54 in every 1001,948
201157 in every 1002,444
201260 in every 1002,722
201362 in every 1002,359
201465 in every 1002,742
201564 in every 1002,476
201670 in every 1002,136
201777 in every 1001,532
201879 in every 100554

FAQs

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

The 2010 Fiat 500C follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test), about 15 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 54.1% of 1,948 first MOTs on the 2010 Fiat 500C passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 60.5%. Among 895 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Shock absorbers (front) appears more often than on similar cars (11.1% of those tests; 97 observed failures; about 4.9× 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 2010 Fiat 500C at the first attempt were Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (15.3%), Shock absorbers (front) (11.1%) and Suspension arm pins and bushes (front) (10.2%), 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) (11.1% of those tests; 97 observed failures; about 4.9× 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 (11.1% of those tests; 97 observed failures; about 4.9× 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 2010 Fiat 500C include Shock absorbers (front), Macpherson strut (front), Handbrake performance (roller test, 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 2010 Fiat 500C (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