Model Reports
8 min readUpdated 11 Sep 2026
DVSA open data · 7,169 tests analysed
Toyota Yaris 2002: reliability & common MOT faults
3,140 first-attempt MOT failures were recorded on the 2002 Toyota Yaris in 2025. The items recorded most often on them were Position lamp (front) and Component mounting prescribed areas (rear). Figures are among first-attempt failed MOT tests, not among all tests.
2002 Yaris break the Yaris's own run — at 56.2% they land 1.9 pp above the midpoint of the 2001 and 2003 cars either side.
First-attempt pass
56.2%
of 7,169 first tests (2025)
First tests
7,169
test year 2025
Failed first attempts
3,140
failed first-attempt tests
Most common fail
12.2%
Position lamp (front)
MOT pass rates
First-attempt and official-style rates among class 4 first tests of the year.
First-attempt pass
56.2%
of 7,169 first tests (2025)
Official-style pass
67.5%
incl. same-day PRS fixes
First tests
7,169
class 4 · first MOT of the year
Typical age 23.0 yrs · median mileage 91,883 mi
vs 2024:
+0.7 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 3,136 of
3,140 failed first attempts
(99.9%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025 —
the subset the age-and-mileage comparison can be computed on.
Standout: Linkage pins and bushes (front) — 9.6% of this year's failed first attempts
Recorded on 301 of those tests. It tops the table on elevation — about 17× 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
Linkage pins and bushes (front)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Linkage pins and bushes
Front
301
×17
9.6%
Strong
Parking brake control — Lever
Brakes > Parking brake control > Lever
Any
74
×3.2
2.4%
Likely
Wheel bearings (rear)
Suspension > Wheel bearings
Rear
112
×2.9
3.6%
Possible
Registration plate lamp(s) (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Registration plate lamp(s)
Rear
108
×2.3
3.4%
Possible
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
Linkage pins and bushes (front)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Linkage pins and bushes
Front
636
×19
20.3%
Strong
Swivel pins and bushes (rear)
Suspension > Axles > Swivel pins and bushes
Rear
150
×5.0
4.8%
Elevated
Seat belts — Condition (front)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems > Seat belts > Condition
Front
181
×4.5
5.8%
Likely
Pins and bushes (rear)
Suspension > Sub-frames > Pins and bushes
Rear
53
×3.8
1.7%
Elevated
Component mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Component mounting prescribed areas
Rear
401
×3.7
12.8%
Elevated
Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Sub-frames > Sub-frame mounting prescribed areas
Rear
82
×3.3
2.6%
Possible
Headlamp (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Headlamps > Headlamp
Front
215
×3.2
6.9%
Elevated
Pins and bushes (front)
Suspension > Anti-roll bars > Pins and bushes
Front
103
×3.0
3.3%
Likely
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 outperforms the Yaris's own age curve — it holds up better than its place in the model's run would predict.
Other Yaris 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.
The items that failed 2002 Yaris 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.
Position lamp (front) — recorded on 12.2% of failed first attempts
Component mounting prescribed areas (rear) — recorded on 10.5% of failed first attempts
Linkage pins and bushes (front) — recorded on 9.6% of failed first attempts
Headlamp aim — recorded on 9.5% of failed first attempts
Catalyst emissions — recorded on 8.6% 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.
2002 Yaris break the Yaris's own run — at 56.2% they land 1.9 pp above the midpoint of the 2001 and 2003 cars either side. In 2025, 56.2% of 7,169 first MOTs on the 2002 Toyota Yaris passed first time (PRS — items fixed at the station the same day — counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 67.5%. Among 3,140 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Linkage pins and bushes (front) appears…
Ranked by how often they were actually recorded, the items that failed 2002 Toyota Yariss most often at the first attempt were Position lamp (front) (12.2%), Component mounting prescribed areas (rear) (10.5%) and Linkage pins and bushes (front) (9.6%) — 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, wh…
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Linkage pins and bushes (front) (9.6% of those tests; 301 observed failures; about 17× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Linkage pins and bushes (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (9.6% of those tests; 301 observed failures; about 17× 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 2002 Toyota Yaris include Linkage pins and bushes (front), Parking brake control — Lever, Wheel bearings (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 2002 Toyota Yaris (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.
20242025
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.