Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Renault Modus 2005: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 47 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2005 Renault Modus were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Individual sidelight or tail light (front).

Summary

The 2005 Renault Modus follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,777 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
47 in every 100
Did not pass first time
53 in every 100935 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
20 yearsabout 78,603 miles
First tests counted
1,777

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)16 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Headlight aim14 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 2005 Renault Modus 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.

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: seat belt condition (rear), 7.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 933 of 935 failed first attempts (99.8%) 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.

Seat belt condition (rear)

Failed on 54 first tests7.5 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Any sign of overstretching is a deficiency, and so is a cut anywhere on a child seat belt. On other belts the size of a cut decides it, with a stricter limit at the webbing edge than away from it. Webbing significantly stretched or weakened has rows in both Major and Dangerous grades.

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

Noise, emissions and leaks

One fault: engine oil leaks, 4.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Engine oil leaks

Failed on 21 first tests4.5 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Leaks of engine coolant, screen wash and the fluid used for selective catalyst reduction are not reasons for failure. Excessive leaking from the engine that is likely to harm the environment or to pose a safety risk to other road users is Major. Continuous leaking likely to pose a serious risk to road safety is graded Dangerous.

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

Brakes

One fault and one wear pattern. The strongest is the brake discs (rear): 3.7 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake discs (rear)

Failed on 32 first tests3.7 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

A brake disc or drum must be significantly worn before it is rejected, and being worn below the manufacturer's recommended limits is not a reason in itself. Significantly and obviously worn is Major, as is contamination with oil or grease. A disc or drum that is fractured, insecure, seriously weakened or missing is graded Dangerous.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 115 first tests, 2.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 26 first tests2.8 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A parking brake that is inoperative on one side is Major. When tested on the road, the failure is the vehicle deviating excessively from a straight line. Vehicles whose parking brake was already tested as the secondary brake are not tested again for this.

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 and one wear pattern. The strongest is the headlight aim not tested: 3.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Headlight aim not tested

Failed on 25 first tests3.5 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 78 first tests2.9 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.

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

Suspension

Five faults. The strongest is the coil spring (rear): 3.0 times as often as on similar cars.

Coil spring (rear)

Failed on 74 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

Coil spring (front)

Failed on 104 first tests2.9 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 103 first tests2.4 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.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 48 first tests, 2.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-roll bar ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 29 first tests2.0 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 joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 73 first tests2.0 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A suspension joint dust cover that is severely deteriorated is Minor. It becomes Major once it is missing or no longer prevents the ingress of dirt, so what matters is whether it still keeps dirt out. DVSA words this for any suspension joint dust cover, and files it here under anti-roll bars.

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

Steering

One fault: track rod end (front), 2.3 times as often as on similar cars.

Track rod end (front)

Failed on 82 first tests2.3 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A steering ball joint with excessive wear or free play is Major, and one worn to the extent there is a serious risk of detachment is graded Dangerous. A dust cover that is damaged but still keeps dirt out is Minor, and one missing or no longer keeping dirt out is Major. Testers must tell wear from a joint's built-in clearance or spring loading.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 28 first tests, 2.0 times as often as on similar cars.

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.

Wheel condition (front)

Noted on 41 first tests3.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Brake light

Noted on 27 first tests3.2 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Seat belt condition (front)

Noted on 21 first tests3.0 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Wheel condition (rear)

Noted on 22 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Brake performance (roller test, rear)

Noted on 57 first tests2.3 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
47in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
8in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
45in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 47.4% of 1,777 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 55.1%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 8 fixed and the 45 not fixed make the 53 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsPassed first time, as tested
Petrol1,43448
Diesel34344

Figures are in every 100 first tests.

Same model, other years

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

40608010020042005200620072008200920102011Older carsNewer cars
40608010020052010Newer cars

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

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200446 in every 100388
2005 This car47 in every 1001,777
200649 in every 1001,450
200748 in every 1001,374
200848 in every 1001,410
200955 in every 100784
201053 in every 1001,313
201149 in every 1001,169

FAQs

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

The 2005 Renault Modus follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Individual sidelight or tail light (front), about 16 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 47.4% of 1,777 first MOTs on the 2005 Renault Modus passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 55.1%. Among 935 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Seat belt condition (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (5.8% of those tests; 54 observed failures; about 7.5× 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 2005 Renault Modus at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (16.1%), Headlight aim (13.8%) and Coil spring (front) (11.1%), 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: Seat belt condition (rear) (5.8% of those tests; 54 observed failures; about 7.5× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Seat belt condition (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (5.8% of those tests; 54 observed failures; about 7.5× 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 2005 Renault Modus include Seat belt condition (rear), Engine oil leaks, Coil spring (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 2005 Renault Modus (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