Peugeot 207 2006: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 49 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2006 Peugeot 207 were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Headlight aim.

Summary

The 2006 Peugeot 207 follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 3,983 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
49 in every 100
Did not pass first time
51 in every 1002,033 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
19 yearsabout 89,007 miles
First tests counted
3,983

What failed most often

  1. Headlight aim15 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Headlight12 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Coil spring (front)11 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 2006 Peugeot 207 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.

Brakes

One fault: brake performance (roller test, rear), 2.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 2,031 of 2,033 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.

Brake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 138 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A wheel with no recorded braking effort on the roller test is graded Dangerous. Inadequate effort, a brake grabbing severely, abnormal lag and excessive fluctuation in effort are each Major. So is significant brake effort recorded with no brake applied, which indicates a binding brake.

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

Lamps and electrical

Two faults and one wear pattern. The strongest is the headlight aim not tested (front): 2.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Headlight aim not tested (front)

Failed on 22 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

Headlamp aim recorded as not tested, or unable to be tested, is a Major failure. These results must only be used where it becomes apparent during the test that the item cannot be tested, and this could not have been identified before starting. The reason must be included in the additional information box.

Individual sidelight or tail light (rear)

Failed on 139 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A position lamp showing red light to the front or white light to the rear is Major. Rear lamps must show a steady red light, and front ones can show white, predominantly white with a blue tinge, or yellow if combined in a yellow headlamp. With a multiple light source, up to half not working is Minor and more than half is Major.

Individual direction indicators (rear)

Failed on 117 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

Suspension

Four faults. The strongest is the coil spring (front): 2.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (front)

Failed on 222 first tests2.4 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.

Anti-roll bar ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 75 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A missing anti-roll bar ball joint dust cover is Major, and so is one that no longer prevents the ingress of dirt. A cover that is only severely deteriorated is Minor. DVSA uses one wording for the dust cover on any suspension joint.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joints (front)

Failed on 110 first tests2.0 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 82 first tests, 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (rear)

Failed on 117 first tests2.0 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 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.

Side repeater indicators

Noted on 25 first tests5.5 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Brake performance (plate test, rear)

Noted on 30 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Engine oil leaks (front)

Noted on 568 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

Anti-roll bar ball joint (front)

Noted on 20 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Exhaust system (rear)

Noted on 135 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm ball joint (front)

Noted on 91 first tests2.0 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
9in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
42in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 49.0% of 3,983 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 58.1%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 42 not fixed make the 51 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsTypical mileagePassed first time, as testedPassed first time, same mileage
Petrol3,07884,224 miles4948
Diesel904112,171 miles4952

Figures are in every 100 first tests. Cars with more miles usually fail more often, so the same-mileage figure gives every fuel the mileage mix of all the cars in this year.

Same model, other years

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

406080100200620072008200920102011201220132014Newer cars
40608010020062010Newer cars

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

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
2006 This car49 in every 1003,983
200750 in every 10013,729
200848 in every 10015,279
200948 in every 10019,894
201049 in every 10021,385
201150 in every 10018,681
201252 in every 10012,178
201355 in every 1002,551
201468 in every 100934

If you are buying one

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

Mileage matters most on a 2006 Peugeot 207.

Of 2006 Peugeot 207 vehicles with under 63,000 miles, 58 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 119,000 miles or more, 44 in every 100 did.

Under 63,000793 tests
58
63,000–81,000803 tests
49
81,000–98,000 Typical car797 tests
48
98,000–119,000795 tests
46
119,000 and over791 tests
44

Petrol or diesel?

Typical mileagePassed first time,
as tested
Passed first time,
same mileage
Petrol84,224 miles4948
Diesel112,171 miles4952

Figures are in every 100 first tests. At the same mileage there is no clear difference between the two.


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 63,00081,000–98,000119,000 and over
Headlight aim5.08.78.7
Headlight4.37.86.8
Coil spring (front)3.96.16.7
Drive shaft joints and boots (front)2.84.05.2
Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front)3.45.13.7

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.

58in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

10in 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 2006 Peugeot 207 follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Headlight aim, about 15 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 49.0% of 3,983 first MOTs on the 2006 Peugeot 207 passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 58.1%. Among 2,033 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Brake performance (roller test, rear) appears more often than on similar cars (6.8% of those tests; 138 observed failures; about 2.5× 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 2006 Peugeot 207 at the first attempt were Headlight aim (14.6%), Headlight (12.0%) and Coil spring (front) (10.9%), 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: Brake performance (roller test, rear) (6.8% of those tests; 138 observed failures; about 2.5× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Brake performance (roller test, rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (6.8% of those tests; 138 observed failures; about 2.5× 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 2006 Peugeot 207 include Brake performance (roller test, rear), Coil spring (front), Individual sidelight or tail light (rear). 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 2006 Peugeot 207 (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