MOT Status
ExpiredMileage
92,730 miSignificantly above average — investigate
Not all car check providers offer a guarantee. Don't risk buying from services that can't back their data. CarVerify reports include a £30,000 finance data guarantee.
Vehicle Details
All premium checks include
50+ data pointsMOT History
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Windscreen damaged but not adversely affecting driver's view (3.2 (a) (i))
both front chassis rails corroded
both front floor pans corroded
front brake pads worn
offside front tyre worn on inner edge
rear foot brake effort low
Offside Rear Coil spring fractured or broken (5.3.1 (b) (i))
Front Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Rear Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Rear Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Nearside Headlamp deteriorated but light output not reduced (1.7.5a)
exhaust corroded
Offside Front Suspension component mounting prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive (2.4.A.3)
Offside Rear coil spring corroded (2.4.C.1b)
Vehicle's internal headlight adjuster altered to recheck lights
front wiperblades deteriorating
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Tyre not fitted in accordance with side wall instructions (4.1.D.1f)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
aux drive belt deteriorating
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement in the upper support bearing assembly (2.5.B.1b)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement in the upper support bearing assembly (2.5.B.1b)
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement in the upper support bearing assembly (2.5.B.1b)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement in the upper support bearing assembly (2.5.B.1b)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
How Reliable is the Ford Ka?
Based on 8,818,307 MOT tests across 675,715 vehicles.
Top MOT Failure Points
Don't risk it. Know before you buy.
Not all vehicle check providers are the same. Some don't offer a data guarantee, which means if their information is wrong, you're on your own. Every CarVerify report is backed by a £30,000 finance data guarantee.
AD51 XCJ is a 2002 Ford Ka in Blue with a 1,299cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 19 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 84.2%.
Across all 2002 Ford Ka models, the average MOT pass rate is 65.6% with a typical mileage of 48,988 miles. This particular vehicle has performed better than the average for its year.
The most common reason a Ford Ka fails its MOT is suspension component mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded, accounting for 404,005 recorded failures. If you're considering buying AD51 XCJ, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Ford Ka typically stays on UK roads for around 29 years. At 24 years old, this Ford Ka is approaching the upper end of the typical lifespan for this model.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of AD51 XCJ?
You can check the full history of AD51 XCJ by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was AD51 XCJ registered?
AD51 XCJ is a 2002 Ford Ka, first registered on 15 January 2002.
Is AD51 XCJ safe to buy?
The MOT history for AD51 XCJ shows 19 tests with a 84.2% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does AD51 XCJ have outstanding finance?
Finance checks require a premium vehicle report. This checks against all major UK finance providers to see if there is any outstanding finance on AD51 XCJ. If you buy a car with outstanding finance, the finance company can repossess it.
No warranty or guarantee of accuracy is provided for any free data on this page. The data guarantee applies only to information obtained through the purchase of a full check.