Model Reports 4 min read Updated 18 Oct 2026

Volvo V70 2003: reliability & common MOT faults

In 2025, 54 in every 100 first MOTs on a 2003 Volvo V70 were passes. Most common reason for a fail: Individual sidelight or tail light (front).

Summary

The 2003 Volvo V70 follows the pattern of the model years either side.

At a glance

How 2,042 first tests went in 2025.

Passed first time
54 in every 100
Did not pass first time
46 in every 100936 failed first-attempt tests
The typical car
22 yearsabout 154,190 miles
First tests counted
2,042

What failed most often

  1. Individual sidelight or tail light (front)22 in every 100 failed tests
  2. Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test)19 in every 100 failed tests
  3. Headlight aim13 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 Volvo V70 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.

Suspension

One fault: anti-roll bar pins and bushes (rear), 5.8 times as often as on similar cars.

Figures below are measured across the 912 of 936 failed first attempts (97.4%) that recorded an odometer reading in 2025. Mileage is needed to compare like with like. 2.6% of failures are excluded because no mileage was recorded, so treat these shares as indicative for this model year.

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 pins and bushes (rear)

Failed on 20 first tests5.8 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

An anti-roll bar pin or bush that is excessively worn is Major, and one likely to become detached is graded Dangerous. The wording is DVSA's general rule 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 48 first tests, 7.1 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.

Body and structure

One fault: fuel cap, 4.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Fuel cap

Failed on 23 first tests4.1 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

A missing or ineffective fuel filler cap is Major, as is a plain fuel system leak, while a fuel system leaking excessively or a risk of fire has its own, separate wording. A fuel tank with a hole, or a split filler neck, from which fuel can leak must be failed for leaking even if the hole or split is above the fuel line.

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

Brakes

Two faults. The strongest is the handbrake lever: 3.5 times as often as on similar cars.

Handbrake lever

Failed on 33 first tests3.5 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)

Failed on 41 first tests2.7 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.

Lamps and electrical

Two faults. The strongest is the individual direction indicators (front): 2.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Individual direction indicators (front)

Failed on 47 first tests2.9 times as often as similar carsPossible evidence

What it means

Direction indicators must be amber, though vehicles first used before a set date may have white at the front and red at the rear when the indicators are combined with stop or position lamps, and sequential or dynamic ones are not a reason to fail. A lamp that is missing, inoperative or has more than half of a multiple light source not functioning is graded Major. A flashing rate outside the permitted range is graded Minor.

Also noted as an advisory

Testers also noted it as an advisory, worn but not yet failing, on 48 first tests, 3.9 times as often as on similar cars.

Individual sidelight or tail light (front)

Failed on 204 first tests2.0 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. Advisories count notes recorded on failed first tests only.

Seat belts and restraints

One fault: seat belt condition (rear), 2.1 times as often as on similar cars.

Seat belt condition (rear)

Failed on 21 first tests2.1 times as often as similar carsPossible 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.

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 (rear)

Noted on 32 first tests5.4 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Wheel condition (front)

Noted on 26 first tests3.1 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Suspension arm pins and bushes (front)

Noted on 193 first tests2.6 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Coil spring

Noted on 26 first tests2.5 times as often as similar carsElevated evidence

Exhaust system (rear)

Noted on 61 first tests2.2 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
54in every 100
Passed on the first test.
Fixed at the station
9in every 100
Failed, then fixed at the test station the same day.
Failed
37in every 100
Did not pass, and were not fixed at the test station.

First-attempt pass 54.2% of 2,042 first tests (2025): only cars that passed first time count. Official-style pass 62.5%: cars fixed at the test station also count as a pass. The 9 fixed and the 37 not fixed make the 46 in every 100 that did not pass first time.

Petrol and diesel

First testsPassed first time, as tested
Petrol1,16254
Diesel87554

Figures are in every 100 first tests.

Same model, other years

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

4060801002000200320102015Older carsNewer cars
406080100200020032010Newer 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, 53 in every 100 passed first time.

YearPassed first timeFirst tests
199760 in every 100440
199859 in every 100634
199961 in every 100777
200060 in every 1001,030
200154 in every 1001,244
200253 in every 1001,825
2003 This car54 in every 1002,042
200454 in every 1002,407
200557 in every 1002,886
200658 in every 1002,267
200760 in every 1002,320
200865 in every 1003,014
200963 in every 1003,328
201067 in every 1002,662
201170 in every 1001,993
201271 in every 1001,501
201372 in every 1001,656
201477 in every 1001,887
201580 in every 1001,942
201681 in every 100735

FAQs

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

The 2003 Volvo V70 follows the pattern of the model years either side. Its main cause of failure was Individual sidelight or tail light (front), about 22 in every 100 failed tests. In 2025, 54.2% of 2,042 first MOTs on the 2003 Volvo V70 passed first time (PRS: items fixed at the station the same day, counted as a fail). The official-style rate including PRS is 62.5%. Among 936 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (rear) appears more often than on similar cars (2.2% of those tests; 20 observed failures; about 5.8× 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 Volvo V70 at the first attempt were Individual sidelight or tail light (front) (22.4%), Handbrake efficiency below minimum (roller test) (18.8%) and Headlight aim (12.7%), 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 pins and bushes (rear) (2.2% of those tests; 20 observed failures; about 5.8× more often than similar cars). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (rear) shows up more often than on similar cars (2.2% of those tests; 20 observed failures; about 5.8× 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 Volvo V70 include Anti-roll bar pins and bushes (rear), Fuel cap, Handbrake lever. 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 Volvo V70 (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