Model Reports 5 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Toyota Aygo 2015: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 80 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2015 Toyota Aygo were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test).

Summary

A 2015 Toyota Aygo passed first time about 2 in every 100 more often than the average of the 2014 and 2016 model years.

At a glance

How 22,441 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
80 in every 100
Did not pass first time
20 in every 1004,494 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
10 yearsabout 52,178 miles
First tests counted
22,441

What failed most often

  1. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)10 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Tyre condition (front)9 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Brake performance (roller test, rear)9 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 2015 Toyota Aygo 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.

Suspension

Two faults. The strongest is the anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front): 25 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 4,492 of 4,494 failed first attempts 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.

Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front)

Failed on 189 first tests25 times as often as similar carsStrong 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 545 first tests, 40 times as often as on similar cars.

Wheel bearings (front)

Failed on 108 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Excessive play in a wheel bearing, or a bearing that is excessively rough, is Major. Play so excessive that the bearing is likely to break up or directional control is impaired is Dangerous, and so is a bearing so rough that it is likely to overheat or break up.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 53 first tests, 2.9 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.

Brakes

Six faults and one wear pattern. The strongest is the brake performance (plate test, rear): 5.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake performance (plate test, rear)

Failed on 90 first tests5.6 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Braking effort that is inadequate at a wheel, a brake grabbing severely and a binding brake are among the Major failures. A wheel with no recorded effort is graded Dangerous. If a vehicle fails any aspect of the plate test, the check should be repeated to confirm the result.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 53 first tests, 3.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Brake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 403 first tests4.4 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

Handbrake lever

Failed on 121 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A parking brake lever pivot or ratchet mechanism that is obviously worn is graded Minor. It is Major when worn to the extent that the brake may inadvertently release, and also when the ratchet is not holding correctly. A lever must have obvious excessive travel before being rejected.

Handbrake performance (roller test, rear)

Failed on 111 first tests3.9 times as often as similar carsLikely 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.

Electronic stability control

Failed on 162 first tests3.7 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

An ESC warning lamp is failed only when the tester is certain it indicates an ESC malfunction, because the lamp takes various forms and the owner's handbook may need checking. The system is also called ESP, VDC or DSC, among many other names. Every failure row is Major, covering the lamp, wheel speed sensors, wiring, other components and the switch.

Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)

Failed on 439 first tests3.3 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A parking brake with efficiency below the minimum requirement is Major, and graded Dangerous where efficiency is less than half of the required value. On a roller brake tester, the requirement counts as met if more than half of the wheels of a brake system lock. The check applies only to vehicles whose parking brake was not already tested as the secondary brake.

Brake discs (front)

Failed on 258 first tests3.1 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.

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.

Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 108 first tests16 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

Structural sub-frame condition (front)

Noted on 25 first tests8.3 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Headlight (front)

Noted on 46 first tests8.3 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension mounting area (rear)

Noted on 42 first tests7.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension sub-frame mounting area (front)

Noted on 20 first tests6.9 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Macpherson strut (front)

Noted on 101 first tests6.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension sub-frame (front)

Noted on 303 first tests5.7 times as often as similar carsLikely 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
80in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
4in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
16in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 80.0% of 22,441 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 84.4%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 4 fixed and the 16 not fixed make the 20 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Same model, other years

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

4060801002005201020152020Older carsNewer cars
406080100201020152020Older 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, 81 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200548 in every 1001,113
200651 in every 1006,284
200753 in every 1007,852
200853 in every 1009,783
200958 in every 10011,437
201059 in every 10010,781
201160 in every 10012,025
201263 in every 10013,964
201368 in every 10014,506
201474 in every 10018,639
2015 This car80 in every 10022,441
201682 in every 10021,503
201784 in every 10020,802
201885 in every 10021,274
201986 in every 10021,387
202087 in every 10016,051
202189 in every 10016,509
202293 in every 1001,396

If you are buying one

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

Mileage matters most on a 2015 Aygo.

Of 2015 Aygo vehicles with under 33,000 miles, 87 in every 100 passed their 2025 MOT first time. With 74,000 miles or more, 70 in every 100 did.

Under 33,0004,412 tests
87
33,000–46,0004,508 tests
85
46,000–58,000 Typical car4,417 tests
81
58,000–74,0004,527 tests
77
74,000 and over4,574 tests
70

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 33,00046,000–58,00074,000 and over
Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)0.31.44.4
Tyre condition (front)1.52.21.9
Brake performance (roller test, rear)0.71.73.4
Brake pads (front)1.01.42.6
Tyre tread depth (front)0.31.52.8

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

When a car fails

42in every 100

of failed cars had one item to fix.

28in every 100

of failed cars had three or more items to fix.

6in 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.

A 2015 Toyota Aygo passed first time about 2 in every 100 more often than the average of the 2014 and 2016 model years. In 2025, 80.0% of 22,441 first MOTs on the 2015 Toyota Aygo passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 84.4%. Among 4,494 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front) appears more often than on similar cars (4.2% of those tests; 189 observed failures; about 25× 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 2015 Toyota Aygo at the first attempt were Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (9.8%), Tyre condition (front) (9.2%) and Brake performance (roller test, rear) (9.0%), 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: Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front) (4.2% of those tests; 189 observed failures; about 25× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (4.2% of those tests; 189 observed failures; about 25× 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 2015 Toyota Aygo include Anti-roll bar linkage pins and bushes (front), Brake performance (plate test, rear), Brake performance (roller test, 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 2015 Toyota Aygo (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