Honda Jazz 2007: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 55 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2007 Honda Jazz were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test).

Summary

The 2007 Honda Jazz follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 17,686 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
55 in every 100
Did not pass first time
45 in every 1007,901 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
18 yearsabout 84,225 miles
First tests counted
17,686

What failed most often

  1. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)21 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)18 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Petrol emissions (with catalyst)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 2007 Honda Jazz 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 macpherson strut (front): 4.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 7,897 of 7,901 failed first attempts (99.9%) 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.

Macpherson strut (front)

Failed on 170 first tests4.4 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.

Anti-roll bar ball joint (front)

Failed on 162 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

On an anti-roll bar ball joint, DVSA fails a suspension pin, bush or joint that is excessively worn as Major. One likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 84 first tests, 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (front)

Failed on 480 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Excessive wear on an anti-roll bar linkage ball joint is Major. A joint likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 304 first tests, 2.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Failed on 643 first tests2.2 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.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 417 first tests, 2.1 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.

Brakes

Two faults and two wear patterns. The strongest is the handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test): 3.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)

Failed on 1,695 first tests3.6 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 pads (rear)

Failed on 458 first tests2.7 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 495 first tests, 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake discs (rear)

Failed on 194 first tests2.5 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 1,031 first tests, 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (rear)

Failed on 469 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Chafing, corrosion or damage to a rigid brake pipe justifies rejection once its wall thickness is reduced by a set amount, although DVSA accepts this is not easy to determine. If a tester is not sure, the benefit of the doubt applies. A leaking pipe or connection is graded Dangerous on a hydraulic system and Major on an air system.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 1,512 first tests, 2.8 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: chassis condition (rear), 2.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Chassis condition (rear)

Failed on 170 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A main load-bearing structural member that is fractured, deformed, modified or inadequately repaired is Major when structural rigidity is significantly reduced, and Dangerous where steering or braking is likely to be adversely affected. Corrosion of the body, cab or chassis at a mounting point is Dangerous where overall security or stability is impaired.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 161 first tests, 2.1 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.

Macpherson strut ball joint (front)

Noted on 68 first tests15 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Macpherson strut pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 605 first tests10 times as often as similar carsStrong evidence

Macpherson strut bracket and mounting (front)

Noted on 76 first tests6.5 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Other suspension component pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 22 first tests4.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

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

Noted on 64 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

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

Noted on 33 first tests3.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Brake pedal

Noted on 81 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Brake performance (plate test, front)

Noted on 76 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsPossible 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
55in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
9in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
36in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 55.3% of 17,686 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 64.4%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 36 not fixed make the 45 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

4060801002007201020152020Older carsNewer cars
406080100200720102020Newer cars

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

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200254 in every 1002,017
200354 in every 1004,846
200453 in every 1008,877
200553 in every 10013,028
200654 in every 10016,652
2007 This car55 in every 10017,686
200855 in every 10018,460
200964 in every 10022,436
201067 in every 10020,956
201173 in every 10019,446
201275 in every 10021,045
201378 in every 10020,706
201481 in every 10019,643
201584 in every 10017,388
201686 in every 10018,007
201788 in every 10017,579
201889 in every 10019,669
201990 in every 10016,298
202091 in every 10010,396
202193 in every 10014,213
202294 in every 10010,311

If you are buying one

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

Mileage matters most on a 2007 Jazz.

Of 2007 Jazz vehicles with under 57,000 miles, 67 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 115,000 miles or more, 47 in every 100 did.

Under 57,0003,528 tests
67
57,000–76,0003,588 tests
58
76,000–93,000 Typical car3,409 tests
54
93,000–115,0003,574 tests
50
115,000 and over3,582 tests
47

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 57,00076,000–93,000115,000 and over
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)6.610.610.8
Individual sidelight or tail light (front)1.78.213.5
Petrol emissions (with catalyst)2.04.56.8
Suspension mounting area (rear)1.83.75.7
Headlight aim2.23.34.1

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


When a car fails

21in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

57in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

11in 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 2007 Honda Jazz follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test), about 21 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 55.3% of 17,686 first MOTs on the 2007 Honda Jazz passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 64.4%. Among 7,901 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Macpherson strut (front) appears more often than on similar cars (2.2% of those tests; 170 observed failures; about 4.4× 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 2007 Honda Jazz at the first attempt were Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (21.5%), Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (18.1%) and Petrol emissions (with catalyst) (9.7%), 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: Macpherson strut (front) (2.2% of those tests; 170 observed failures; about 4.4× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Macpherson strut (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (2.2% of those tests; 170 observed failures; about 4.4× 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 2007 Honda Jazz include Macpherson strut (front), Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test), Anti-roll bar ball joint (front). 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 2007 Honda Jazz (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