Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Renault Kangoo 2003: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 48 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2003 Renault Kangoo were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Drive shaft joints and boots (front).

Summary

With 947 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2003 Renault Kangoo differs from the model years either side.

At a glance

How 947 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
48 in every 100
Did not pass first time
52 in every 100490 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
22 yearsabout 95,912 miles
First tests counted
947

What failed most often

  1. Drive shaft joints and boots (front)14 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Airbag warning light14 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Windscreen washers12 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 2003 Renault Kangoo 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.

Lamps and electrical

One fault: hazard warning switch, 18 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 486 of 490 failed first attempts (99.2%) 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.

Hazard warning switch

Failed on 27 first tests18 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A hazard warning switch that is inoperative is Major, while one that is faulty or insecure is Minor. The lamps must work from one switch only, with the engine or ignition switch both on and off.

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

Steering

One fault: steering rack (front), 8.2 times as often as on similar cars.

Steering rack (front)

Failed on 34 first tests8.2 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Steering gear casing retaining devices dangerously loose, or visible relative movement to the chassis or bodywork, is graded Dangerous. A casing not properly attached, or fractured, is Major, but a fracture that affects the stability or attachment of the casing is Dangerous. A gaiter damaged but still keeping dirt out is Minor, and Major once missing or no longer doing so.

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

Suspension

Three faults. The strongest is the anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front): 6.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 26 first tests6.3 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Excessive wear in an anti-roll bar linkage pin or bush is Major. If the pin or bush is likely to become detached, it is graded Dangerous. The wording is DVSA's general one for a suspension pin, bush or joint.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 47 first tests, 6.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (front)

Failed on 39 first tests2.7 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.

Suspension arm ball joint (front)

Failed on 48 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A suspension arm ball joint is failed under the general suspension pin, bush or joint wording. Excessively worn is Major, and likely to become detached is graded Dangerous.

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

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: airbag warning light, 4.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Airbag warning light

Failed on 66 first tests4.6 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

The airbag warning lamp (SRS MIL in DVSA's wording) is failed only if it indicates a system malfunction, which is Major. A lamp lit to show the passenger airbag is disabled is not to be regarded as a defect. Dashboard messages are not a defect in their own right, though they can help the tester confirm a malfunction.

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

Brakes

Three faults. The strongest is the brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear): 3.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake imbalance across an axle (roller test, efficiency check, rear)

Failed on 42 first tests3.4 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A wheel giving less than a set share of the maximum effort from the other wheel on the same axle is Major. On a steered axle, less than half is graded Dangerous. Testers disregard an imbalance if the lower effort is the result of a locked wheel, or if the higher effort from a wheel is at or below a low set figure.

Brake efficiency below minimum (roller test)

Failed on 20 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Service brake efficiency below the minimum requirement is Major, and efficiency less than half of the required value is graded Dangerous. On a roller brake tester, if more than half of the wheels of a brake system lock, the efficiency requirement for that system counts as met.

Brake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 30 first tests2.2 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.

Body and structure

One fault: drive shaft joints and boots (front), 2.4 times as often as on similar cars.

Drive shaft joints and boots (front)

Failed on 70 first tests2.4 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A constant velocity boot that is only severely deteriorated is Minor. It is Major once it is missing, split or insecure so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt. A transmission joint excessively worn is Major, and graded Dangerous when it is so worn it is likely to fail.

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.

Macpherson strut pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 20 first tests3.9 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Track rod end (front)

Noted on 23 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Non-component advisories (front)

Noted on 53 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
48in 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
46in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 48.3% of 947 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 54.5%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 6 fixed and the 46 not fixed make the 52 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsPassed first time, as tested
Diesel55647
Petrol39150

Figures are in every 100 first tests.

Same model, other years

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

4060801002003201020152020Newer cars
406080100200320102020Newer 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, 49 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200250 in every 100634
2003 This car48 in every 100947
200450 in every 1001,475
200549 in every 1001,833
200651 in every 1002,128
200752 in every 1002,743
200853 in every 1002,544
200948 in every 1001,850
201046 in every 1004,122
201147 in every 1004,550
201251 in every 1002,876
201347 in every 1002,099
201450 in every 1002,970
201552 in every 1003,715
201656 in every 1003,207
201757 in every 1002,258
201862 in every 1002,304
201965 in every 1002,975
202069 in every 1001,927
202171 in every 1001,823
202285 in every 100509

FAQs

Short answers about how to read this model-year guide.

With 947 first tests, there are too few to say whether the 2003 Renault Kangoo differs from the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Drive shaft joints and boots (front), about 14 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 48.3% of 947 first MOTs on the 2003 Renault Kangoo passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 54.5%. Among 490 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Hazard warning switch appears more often than on similar cars (5.6% of those tests; 27 observed failures; about 18× 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 2003 Renault Kangoo at the first attempt were Drive shaft joints and boots (front) (14.4%), Airbag warning light (13.6%) and Windscreen washers (12.1%), 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: Hazard warning switch (5.6% of those tests; 27 observed failures; about 18× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Hazard warning switch shows up more often than on similar cars (5.6% of those tests; 27 observed failures; about 18× 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 2003 Renault Kangoo include Hazard warning switch, Steering rack (front), Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (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 2003 Renault Kangoo (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