2010 Toyota Alphard- — MOT failures & pass rate
The 2010 Toyota Alphard- passed 85.2% of its 1,644 recorded MOT tests. All cars of a similar age fail 25.1% of the time, so this is 10.3pp better than the group it competes with. Failures cluster in lighting & signalling, suspension and tyres.
What the MOT record shows
Lighting & signalling dominates the failure mix at 10.6% of all tests — 3.8 points clear of suspension, so it is the first thing to check.
At component level the recurring items are rear fog lamp, linkage ball joint dust cover and ball joint dust cover — rear fog lamp alone was recorded 82 times.
Mileage matters less than usual here: the 2010 Alphard- fails 13.5% of the time in the 30-60k band and 12.9% at 150k+, a spread of only 0.6 points.
Advisories point at the next bill rather than this one: suspension was flagged on 19.8% of tests without failing them.
The trend is worsening — 10.2% of tests failed in 2021 against 17.0% in 2025, the usual pattern as a fleet ages.
How it compares
Top failure categories
| # | Category | % of tests affected | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lighting & signalling | 10.6% | 174 |
| 2 | Suspension | 6.8% | 112 |
| 3 | Tyres | 3.0% | 50 |
| 4 | Visibility | 2.4% | 40 |
| 5 | Brakes | 2.3% | 37 |
| 6 | Body, structure & corrosion | 1.0% | 16 |
Most common specific failures
The exact components most often recorded as failures — more specific than the categories above.
| # | Failure item | Times recorded |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rear fog lamp | 82 |
| 2 | Linkage ball joint dust cover | 52 |
| 3 | Ball joint dust cover | 49 |
| 4 | Position lamp | 46 |
| 5 | Tread depth | 38 |
| 6 | Headlamp | 36 |
Top advisory categories
Advisories aren't failures, but they flag work likely needed soon — useful when budgeting.
| # | Category | % of tests with advisory | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Suspension | 19.8% | 325 |
| 2 | Tyres | 16.3% | 268 |
| 3 | Brakes | 11.3% | 185 |
| 4 | Other defects | 7.1% | 116 |
| 5 | Lighting & signalling | 5.3% | 87 |
| 6 | Steering | 2.4% | 39 |
Failure rate by mileage
Higher-mileage cars tend to fail more — often the most useful guide to real condition.
| Mileage band | Tests | Fail rate |
|---|---|---|
| 30-60k | 386 | 13.5% |
| 60-90k | 866 | 14.2% |
| 90-120k | 261 | 19.2% |
| 120-150k | 69 | 17.4% |
| 150k+ | 31 | 12.9% |
Failure rate by age
By fuel type
| Fuel | Tests | Fail rate |
|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | 1,512 | 15.3% |
| Petrol | 132 | 9.1% |
Trend over time
| Dataset year | Tests | Fail rate |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 127 | 10.2% |
| 2022 | 253 | 15.0% |
| 2023 | 351 | 13.7% |
| 2024 | 406 | 14.5% |
| 2025 | 507 | 17.0% |
What to check before buying a 2010 Alphard-
On a 2010 Alphard-, lighting & signalling is what the MOT record says goes wrong most — it appeared in 10.6% of tests. Check these areas before you commit.
- Lighting & signalling (10.6% of tests): Often a cheap bulb, but persistent issues can mean wiring or corrosion in the units. Typical repair: £10–£150.
- Suspension (6.8% of tests): Worn drop links, bushes, springs or shocks — listen for knocks over bumps and check for uneven tyre wear. Typical repair: £150–£450 per corner.
- Tyres (3.0% of tests): Usually a quick, known-cost fix, but check tread, age and uneven wear (which can hint at alignment or suspension issues). Typical repair: £50–£120 per tyre.
Repair costs are rough UK ballpark ranges to set expectations, not quotes — actual prices vary widely by car, parts and garage.
Frequently asked questions
How many 2010 Toyota Alphard-s pass their MOT?
85.2% of the 1,644 2010 Toyota Alphard- MOT tests in this dataset passed — a 14.8% fail rate.
What is the most common MOT failure on a 2010 Toyota Alphard-?
Lighting & signalling, recorded in 10.6% of tests, followed by suspension (6.8%).
Does the 2010 Alphard- get worse with mileage?
Its MOT fail rate rises from 13.5% in the 30-60k band to 12.9% in the 150k+ band.
Methodology & source. Based on 1,644 MOT tests. Dataset: DVSA MOT testing data (2021,2022,2023,2024,2025). Data last updated 2026-07-27. Figures reflect MOT-testable defects only — read the methodology for how these are calculated and what they don't measure.