Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Volkswagen Eos 2010: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 61 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2010 Volkswagen Eos were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Coil spring (front).

Summary

The 2010 Volkswagen Eos follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 1,729 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
61 in every 100
Did not pass first time
39 in every 100674 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
15 yearsabout 92,485 miles
First tests counted
1,729

What failed most often

  1. Coil spring (front)12 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Tyre condition (front)12 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front)12 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 2010 Volkswagen Eos 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

Four faults. The strongest is the suspension arm (rear): 7.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 674 failed first attempts in 2025 that had a mileage recorded, which allows a like-for-like comparison.

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.

Suspension arm (rear)

Failed on 48 first tests7.9 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

A missing bump stop rubber is not a reason to fail a suspension arm. A component that is fractured, missing or likely to fail is graded Dangerous, and one excessively damaged or corroded is Major. On some vehicles, some highly stressed parts are thin pressed steel, and many of those have hollow box sections or up-facing areas that can collect road dirt and salt, so they get special attention.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 104 first tests, 5.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 56 first tests3.9 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

Whether a suspension arm ball joint dust cover still keeps dirt out decides its grade. Severely deteriorated is Minor, while missing, or no longer preventing the ingress of dirt, is Major.

Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 78 first tests2.9 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.

Anti-roll bar ball joint dust cover (front)

Failed on 27 first tests2.6 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.

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

Two faults and one wear pattern. The strongest is the anti-lock braking system (ABS): 4.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Anti-lock braking system (ABS)

Failed on 53 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsLikely evidence

What it means

ABS is failed as removed only where it has obviously been removed, because not every vehicle in the age range where removal is not permitted has ABS. A warning lamp that does not light or shows an ABS fault is Major, as is a missing or excessively damaged wheel speed sensor. Every failure row for this component is Major.

Electronic stability control

Failed on 22 first tests3.9 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

Brake pads (rear)

Failed on 41 first tests2.2 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

A pad worn down to its wear indicator, or contaminated with oil or grease, is Major. A pad worn below the set thickness limit, missing or incorrectly mounted is Dangerous. The manual treats an illuminated brake wear indicator as no reason for failure, although DVSA also lists an illuminated indicator as a Major row.

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

Noise, emissions and leaks

One fault: diesel engine warning light, 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Diesel engine warning light

Failed on 27 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

An engine malfunction indicator lamp that is illuminated to show a malfunction is graded Major on a diesel, but only on the diesels the test covers, which depends on the vehicle type and when it was first used. DVSA lists it under exhaust emissions for compression ignition engines, and the detail line for the row also names an inoperative lamp.

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

Lamps and electrical

One fault: side repeater indicators, 2.6 times as often as on similar cars.

Side repeater indicators

Failed on 28 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Sequential or dynamic direction indicators are not a reason to fail. Where a side repeater is required, it is allowed to be part of the front direction indicator if it has a marked wraparound lens, or an amber light coming through the front lens when viewed from a set distance to the side of the rear bumper. A lens defect with no effect on the emitted light is Minor, and one that adversely affects the light is Major.

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

Tyres

One wear pattern: tyre condition (rear), 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Tyre condition (rear)

Failed on 75 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsWear pattern

What it means

Exposed or damaged ply or cords are graded Dangerous. A cut in excess of the requirements and deep enough to reach the ply or cords is Major, and testers may open the cut with a blunt instrument to check its depth. A tyre contacting the vehicle through flexing or suspension movement is not a defect; fouling fails only at the time of test.

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.

Suspension arm pins and bushes (rear)

Noted on 47 first tests3.8 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension sub-frame (rear)

Noted on 97 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Shock absorbers (front)

Noted on 69 first tests2.6 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
61in 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
35in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 61.0% of 1,729 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 65.4%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 4 fixed and the 35 not fixed make the 39 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsPassed first time, as tested
Diesel1,09061
Petrol63961

Figures are in every 100 first tests.

Same model, other years

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

406080100200620072008200920102011201220132014Older carsNewer cars
4060801002010Older 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, 64 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
200659 in every 100767
200759 in every 1002,267
200862 in every 1002,058
200961 in every 1001,067
2010 This car61 in every 1001,729
201165 in every 1001,259
201270 in every 100359
201376 in every 100434
201475 in every 100322

FAQs

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

The 2010 Volkswagen Eos follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Coil spring (front), about 12 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 61.0% of 1,729 first MOTs on the 2010 Volkswagen Eos passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 65.4%. Among 674 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Suspension arm (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (7.1% of those tests; 48 observed failures; about 7.9× 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 2010 Volkswagen Eos at the first attempt were Coil spring (front) (12.3%), Tyre condition (front) (11.6%) and Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover (front) (11.6%), 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: Suspension arm (rear) (7.1% of those tests; 48 observed failures; about 7.9× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Suspension arm (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (7.1% of those tests; 48 observed failures; about 7.9× 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 2010 Volkswagen Eos include Suspension arm (rear), Anti-lock braking system (ABS), Suspension arm ball joint dust cover (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 2010 Volkswagen Eos (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