Fiat Panda 2004: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 49 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2004 Fiat Panda were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test).

Summary

The 2004 Fiat Panda follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,898 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
49 in every 100
Did not pass first time
51 in every 100972 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
21 yearsabout 77,604 miles
First tests counted
1,898

What failed most often

  1. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)17 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Suspension mounting area (rear)13 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 2004 Fiat Panda 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): 6.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 972 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.

Shock absorbers (front)

Failed on 91 first tests6.2 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 64 first tests, 2.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Macpherson strut (front)

Failed on 21 first tests5.0 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.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 97 first tests2.8 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.

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Failed on 127 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

The load bearing structure within a set distance of a sub-frame, spring or suspension component mounting is a prescribed area. Major applies when its strength or continuity is significantly reduced or it is inadequately repaired. Dangerous applies when it is so weakened that control of the vehicle is likely to be adversely affected.

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

Noise, emissions and leaks

One fault: engine oil leaks, 4.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Engine oil leaks

Failed on 22 first tests4.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Leaks of engine coolant, screen wash and the fluid used for selective catalyst reduction are not reasons for failure. Excessive leaking from the engine that is likely to harm the environment or to pose a safety risk to other road users is Major. Continuous leaking likely to pose a serious risk to road safety is graded Dangerous.

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

Brakes

Three faults. The strongest is the brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear): 3.7 times as often as on similar cars.

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

Failed on 65 first tests3.7 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 performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 36 first tests3.6 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 168 first tests2.6 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.

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

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: seat belt mounting area, 3.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Seat belt mounting area

Failed on 23 first tests3.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A seat belt anchorage likely to become detached in the event of a collision is graded Dangerous. The load bearing structure near an anchorage, called a prescribed area, is Major when its strength or continuity is significantly reduced or it is inadequately repaired. Anchorage points are inspected for all seat belts fitted, except a belt with no corresponding seat.

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

Lamps and electrical

One fault: individual direction indicators (rear), 3.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Individual direction indicators (rear)

Failed on 67 first tests3.5 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Direction indicators must be amber, though vehicles first used before a set date may have white at the front and red at the rear when the indicators are combined with stop or position lamps, and sequential or dynamic ones are not a reason to fail. A lamp that is missing, inoperative or has more than half of a multiple light source not functioning is graded Major. A flashing rate outside the permitted range is graded Minor.

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

Tyres

One wear pattern: tyre tread depth (front), 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Tyre tread depth (front)

Failed on 73 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

Only primary grooves count when tread depth is assessed: those holding the wear indicators, or cut as deep as those when new. Shallower secondary grooves are ignored. Tread depth below the minimum for the vehicle is Dangerous, and so is a pattern not visible over the whole tread, but that second row applies only to vehicles that need the lower minimum.

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.

Side repeater indicators

Noted on 35 first tests5.7 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Macpherson strut pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 37 first tests4.2 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Other suspension component (rear)

Noted on 21 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Exhaust system (front)

Noted on 38 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Coil spring (rear)

Noted on 172 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring (front)

Noted on 82 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
49in 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
45in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 48.8% of 1,898 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 55.0%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 6 fixed and the 45 not fixed make the 51 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

4060801002004201020152020Newer cars
406080100200420102020Newer cars

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

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
2004 This car49 in every 1001,898
200552 in every 1002,329
200653 in every 1003,045
200753 in every 1004,080
200852 in every 1003,891
200956 in every 1008,653
201057 in every 1007,823
201158 in every 1004,871
201264 in every 1005,966
201365 in every 1007,045
201468 in every 1007,563
201570 in every 1007,591
201673 in every 1004,645
201776 in every 1003,400
201879 in every 1002,590
201981 in every 1002,470
202083 in every 1001,727
202185 in every 1001,091
202290 in every 100680

FAQs

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

The 2004 Fiat Panda follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test), about 17 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 48.8% of 1,898 first MOTs on the 2004 Fiat Panda passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 55.0%. Among 972 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Shock absorbers (front) appears more often than on similar cars (9.4% of those tests; 91 observed failures; about 6.2× 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 2004 Fiat Panda at the first attempt were Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (17.3%), Suspension mounting area (rear) (13.1%) and Suspension arm pins and bushes (front) (10.0%), 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) (9.4% of those tests; 91 observed failures; about 6.2× 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 (9.4% of those tests; 91 observed failures; about 6.2× 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 2004 Fiat Panda include Shock absorbers (front), Macpherson strut (front), Engine oil leaks. 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 2004 Fiat Panda (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