Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Mercedes-Benz ML 2010: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 68 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Individual sidelight or tail light (front).

Summary

The 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 2,334 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
68 in every 100
Did not pass first time
32 in every 100754 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
15 yearsabout 118,632 miles
First tests counted
2,334

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)13 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Coil spring (rear)13 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)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 Mercedes-Benz ML 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.

Brakes

Three faults. The strongest is the handbrake efficiency below minimum (decelerometer test): 13 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 754 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.

Handbrake efficiency below minimum (decelerometer test)

Failed on 30 first tests13 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A parking brake with efficiency below the minimum requirement is graded Major, and efficiency less than half of the required value is graded Dangerous. This check applies only to vehicles whose parking brake has not already been tested as the secondary brake.

Rigid brake pipes (front)

Failed on 21 first tests3.3 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 51 first tests, 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Rigid brake pipes (rear)

Failed on 39 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

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

Lamps and electrical

One fault: side repeater indicators (front), 5.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Side repeater indicators (front)

Failed on 70 first tests5.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Sequential or dynamic direction indicators are not a reason to fail. Where a side repeater is required, it is allowed to be part of the front direction indicator if it has a marked wraparound lens, or an amber light coming through the front lens when viewed from a set distance to the side of the rear bumper. A lens defect with no effect on the emitted light is Minor, and one that adversely affects the light is Major.

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

Noise, emissions and leaks

One fault: diesel engine warning light, 3.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Diesel engine warning light

Failed on 59 first tests3.4 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

An engine malfunction indicator lamp that is illuminated to show a malfunction is graded Major on a diesel, but only on the diesels the test covers, which depends on the vehicle type and when it was first used. DVSA lists it under exhaust emissions for compression ignition engines, and the detail line for the row also names an inoperative lamp.

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

Suspension

One fault: coil spring (rear), 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (rear)

Failed on 96 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A missing bump stop rubber is not a reason to fail a coil spring. When the vehicle is jacked and lowered, a spring that does not correctly locate as the suspension returns to its normal running position is rejected as insecurely attached. A missing spring is Major, and graded Dangerous where directional control is affected.

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.

Engine oil leaks (front)

Noted on 32 first tests2.1 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
68in 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
26in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 67.7% of 2,334 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 73.9%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 6 fixed and the 26 not fixed make the 32 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

406080100200520102015Older carsNewer cars
4060801002010Older carsNewer 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, 69 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200156 in every 100348
200259 in every 100619
200359 in every 100698
200457 in every 100937
200559 in every 100724
200667 in every 1001,315
200767 in every 1001,649
200867 in every 1001,811
200967 in every 1001,700
2010 This car68 in every 1002,334
201170 in every 1002,327
201276 in every 1002,402
201380 in every 1003,959
201480 in every 1003,654
201581 in every 1003,031

If you are buying one

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

Mileage makes a modest difference on a 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML.

Of 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML vehicles with under 95,000 miles, 72 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 145,000 miles or more, 66 in every 100 did.

Under 95,000465 tests
72
95,000–112,000475 tests
66
112,000–127,000 Typical car474 tests
68
127,000–145,000448 tests
67
145,000 and over472 tests
66

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 95,000112,000–127,000145,000 and over
Individual sidelight or tail light (front)1.54.95.1
Coil spring (rear)5.63.43.6
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)2.24.22.8
Side repeater indicators3.42.32.3
Tyre condition (front)2.42.13.2

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

When a car fails

33in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

40in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

9in 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 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Individual sidelight or tail light (front), about 13 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 67.7% of 2,334 first MOTs on the 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 73.9%. Among 754 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Handbrake efficiency below minimum (decelerometer test) appears more often than on similar cars (4.0% of those tests; 30 observed failures; about 13× 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 Mercedes-Benz ML at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (12.7%), Coil spring (rear) (12.7%) and Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (10.3%), 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: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (decelerometer test) (4.0% of those tests; 30 observed failures; about 13× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (decelerometer test) shows up more often than on similar cars (4.0% of those tests; 30 observed failures; about 13× 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 Mercedes-Benz ML include Handbrake efficiency below minimum (decelerometer test), Side repeater indicators (front), Diesel engine warning light. 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 Mercedes-Benz ML (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