Model Reports 8 min read Updated 11 Sep 2026 DVSA open data · 2,874 tests analysed

Nissan Navara 2012: reliability & common MOT faults

1,379 first-attempt MOT failures were recorded on the 2012 Nissan Navara in 2025. The items recorded most often on them were Malfunction indicator lamp and Position lamp (front). Figures are among first-attempt failed MOT tests, not among all tests.

2012 Navaras break the Navara's own run — at 52.0% they land 4.1 pp below the midpoint of the 2011 and 2013 cars either side.

First-attempt pass

52.0%

of 2,874 first tests (2025)

First tests

2,874

test year 2025

Failed first attempts

1,379

failed first-attempt tests

Most common fail

15.5%

Malfunction indicator lamp

MOT pass rates

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

First-attempt pass

52.0%

of 2,874 first tests (2025)

Official-style pass

60.5%

incl. same-day PRS fixes

First tests

2,874

class 4 · first MOT of the year

Typical age 13.0 yrs · median mileage 123,762 mi

vs 2024: -0.3 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 1,370 of 1,379 failed first attempts (99.3%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025 — the subset the age-and-mileage comparison can be computed on.

Standout: Chassis condition (rear) — 8.5% of this year's failed first attempts

Recorded on 116 of those tests. It tops the table on elevation — about 38× 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
Spring mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Spring mounting prescribed areas
 Rear 35 ×40 2.6% Likely
Chassis condition (rear)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Rear 116 ×38 8.5% Strong
Prop shafts — Joints (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Transmission > Prop shafts > Joints
 Front 45 ×22 3.3% Likely
Service brake imbalance (rear)
Brakes > Brake performance > Service Brake Efficiency (sp) > Rbt (sp) > Service brake imbalance
 Rear 85 ×8.9 6.2% Likely
Component mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Component mounting prescribed areas
 Rear 94 ×8.2 6.9% Likely
Malfunction indicator lamp
Noise, emissions and leaks > Exhaust emissions > Compression ignition > Malfunction indicator lamp
 Any 213 ×5.2 15.5% Strong
Individual direction indicators (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Direction indicators > Flashing type > Individual direction indicators
 Front 76 ×5.1 5.5% Likely
SRS malfunction indicator lamp
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems > SRS malfunction indicator lamp
 Any 98 ×3.9 7.2% Likely
Emissions not tested
Noise, emissions and leaks > Exhaust emissions > Compression ignition > Emissions not tested
 Any 30 ×3.5 2.2% Likely
Rigid brake pipes (front)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
 Front 35 ×3.3 2.6% Likely

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
Prop shafts — Joints (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Transmission > Prop shafts > Joints
 Front 32 ×188 2.3% Likely
Chassis condition (rear)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
 Rear 79 ×15 5.8% Elevated
Ball joint (front)
Suspension > Other suspension component > Ball joint
 Front 21 ×13 1.5% Elevated
Wheel bearings (rear)
Suspension > Wheel bearings
 Rear 57 ×8.9 4.2% Elevated
Individual direction indicators (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Direction indicators > Flashing type > Individual direction indicators
 Front 69 ×5.3 5.0% Likely
Ball joint (front)
Suspension > Suspension arms > Ball joint
 Front 139 ×4.0 10.1% Elevated
Wheel bearings (front)
Suspension > Wheel bearings
 Front 49 ×3.3 3.6% Possible
Exhaust system (rear)
Body, chassis, structure > Exhaust system
 Rear 99 ×2.9 7.2% Possible
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.

This year underperforms the Navara's own age curve. If the years listed below are in budget, they are the stronger buy on this evidence.

Other Navara 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
2016 Navara +6.1 pp better 70.2% 7,275
2015 Navara -3.6 pp worse 60.4% 3,600

What to check on a 2012 Navara

The items that failed 2012 Navaras 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.

  • Malfunction indicator lamp — recorded on 15.5% of failed first attempts
  • Position lamp (front) — recorded on 15.2% of failed first attempts
  • Track rod end (front) — recorded on 12.6% of failed first attempts
  • Ball joint (front) — recorded on 11.5% of failed first attempts
  • Drive shafts — Joints (front) — recorded on 9.6% 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.

2012 Navaras break the Navara's own run — at 52.0% they land 4.1 pp below the midpoint of the 2011 and 2013 cars either side. In 2025, 52.0% of 2,874 first MOTs on the 2012 Nissan Navara 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 1,379 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Chassis condition (rear) appears mor…
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that failed 2012 Nissan Navaras most often at the first attempt were Malfunction indicator lamp (15.5%), Position lamp (front) (15.2%) and Track rod end (front) (12.6%) — 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 common-faults ta…
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Chassis condition (rear) (8.5% of those tests; 116 observed failures; about 38× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Chassis condition (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (8.5% of those tests; 116 observed failures; about 38× 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 2012 Nissan Navara include Chassis condition (rear), Malfunction indicator lamp, Spring mounting prescribed areas (rear). 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 2012 Nissan Navara (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