Model Reports 8 min read Updated 11 Sep 2026 DVSA open data · 21,023 tests analysed

Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2019: reliability & common MOT faults

3,357 first-attempt MOT failures were recorded on the 2019 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque in 2025. The items recorded most often on them were Tyres — Condition (front) and Malfunction indicator lamp. Figures are among first-attempt failed MOT tests, not among all tests.

Petrol Range Rover Evoques passed first time 3.9 pp more often than diesel ones (87.3% of 3,339 vs 83.4% of 17,678).

First-attempt pass

84.0%

of 21,023 first tests (2025)

First tests

21,023

test year 2025

Failed first attempts

3,357

failed first-attempt tests

Most common fail

20.4%

Tyres — Condition (front)

MOT pass rates

First-attempt and official-style rates among class 4 first tests of the year.

First-attempt pass

84.0%

of 21,023 first tests (2025)

Official-style pass

86.6%

incl. same-day PRS fixes

First tests

21,023

class 4 · first MOT of the year

Typical age 6.0 yrs · median mileage 42,390 mi

vs 2024: -1.3 pp first-attempt

Note:

  • Class 4 cars · first MOT of the year per vehicle · P/PRS/F outcomes (2025 data).
  • PRS (fixed at the station the same day) counts as a fail in the first-attempt rate.
  • Raw outcomes for this cohort — not adjusted for age, mileage, or peer mix.
  • MOT doesn't test engine or gearbox internals.

Common faults

Failure patterns that show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars.

These MOT failure patterns show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars of the same class, age, and mileage.

Shares below are measured across the 3,356 of 3,357 failed first attempts that recorded an odometer reading in 2025 — the subset the age-and-mileage comparison can be computed on.

Standout: Linkage ball joints (front) — 4.6% of this year's failed first attempts

Recorded on 154 of those tests. It tops the table on elevation — about 11× more often than on similar cars of the same age and mileage. That is what makes it unusual for its class, which is a different question from what is most likely to fail; the buying checklist ranks by that. The full ranked list is in the table below.

Fault pattern Location Failures vs similar cars Share of fails Confidence
Diesel emissions test (compression-ignition rules for vehicles from 01/01/2014) Any 182 ×17 5.4% Strong
Linkage ball joints (front)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Linkage ball joints
 Front 154 ×11 4.6% Strong
Malfunction indicator lamp
Noise, emissions and leaks > Exhaust emissions > Compression ignition > Malfunction indicator lamp
 Any 444 ×5.7 13.2% Strong
Registration plates (front)
Identification of the vehicle > Registration plates
 Front 72 ×3.0 2.1% Possible
SRS malfunction indicator lamp
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems > SRS malfunction indicator lamp
 Any 98 ×2.7 2.9% Possible
Malfunction indicator lamp
Noise, emissions and leaks > Exhaust emissions > Spark ignition > Malfunction indicator lamp
 Any 199 ×2.4 5.9% Possible

Only patterns that clear minimum sample and elevation thresholds are shown (at least 20 failures and about 2.0× more often than similar cars).

Note: Rates and comparisons are among first-attempt failed tests, not all MOTs. Patterns come from MOT defect codes — not manufacturer service bulletins, recalls, or a diagnosis of any individual car. Failures and advisories are listed separately.

Advisories

Notes recorded at the test that appear more often than on similar cars.

Advisory notes recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear more often than on similar cars.

Advisory pattern Location Notes vs similar cars Share Confidence
Linkage ball joints (front)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Linkage ball joints
 Front 151 ×17 4.5% Strong
Ball joint (front)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Ball joint
 Front 30 ×15 0.9% Likely
Exhaust system (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Exhaust system
 Front 54 ×3.0 1.6% Elevated
Note: Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.

If you are buying one

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

On this year, prefer the petrol. The diesel cars passed first time 3.9 pp less often, on 17,678 tests.

Other Range Rover Evoque years worth knowing about

Newer cars always pass more often, so a plain "best year" list would just rank by age. These are the years that beat or miss the trend their own neighbouring years set — the only age-adjusted signal this data supports.

Year vs the years either side First-attempt pass (rises with newer cars) First tests
2021 Range Rover Evoque +1.0 pp better 88.7% 13,038

What to check on a 2019 Range Rover Evoque

The items that failed 2019 Range Rover Evoques most often, as a share of the year's failed first attempts. This is what goes wrong, not what is unusual — the table further up the page covers that.

  • Tyres — Condition (front) — recorded on 20.4% of failed first attempts
  • Malfunction indicator lamp — recorded on 13.2% of failed first attempts
  • Brake pads (rear) — recorded on 10.8% of failed first attempts
  • Tread depth (front) — recorded on 6.1% of failed first attempts
  • Malfunction indicator lamp — recorded on 5.9% of failed first attempts

Every figure here is a first-attempt MOT rate from DVSA open data for this model line. 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.

Petrol Range Rover Evoques passed first time 3.9 pp more often than diesel ones (87.3% of 3,339 vs 83.4% of 17,678). In 2025, 84.0% of 21,023 first MOTs on the 2019 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque passed first time (PRS — items fixed at the station the same day — counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 86.6%. Among 3,357 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Linkage ball joints (front)…
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that failed 2019 Land Rover Range Rover Evoques most often at the first attempt were Tyres — Condition (front) (20.4%), Malfunction indicator lamp (13.2%) and Brake pads (rear) (10.8%) — each as a share of the year's failed first attempts. That is what goes wrong on the car. It is a different question from which patterns are unusual for the class, which the…
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Linkage ball joints (front) (4.6% of those tests; 154 observed failures; about 11× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Linkage ball joints (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (4.6% of those tests; 154 observed failures; about 11× 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 check point, not a manufacturer service bulletin.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2019 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque include Linkage ball joints (front), Malfunction indicator lamp, Registration plates (front). These patterns show up more often than on similar cars after we filter out sparse noise — not a full list of every possible fault on an 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 2019 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (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.
  • We never invent pass rates, star scores, or ranks when those data marts are missing.

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