MOT Status
ValidMileage
92,314 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
Nearside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Offside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Nearside Rear Direction indicator not working (4.4.1 (a) (ii))
Offside Rear Direction indicator not working (4.4.1 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Offside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Nearside Rear Direction indicator not working (4.4.1 (a) (ii))
Offside Rear Direction indicator not working (4.4.1 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Offside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Nearside Front Position lamp not working (4.2.1 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Track rod end ball joint has excessive play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Nearside Rear Lower Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Offside Front Track rod end ball joint dust cover excessively damaged or deteriorated so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.1.3 (g) (ii))
Offside Rear Lower Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Rear fog lamp not working (4.5.1 (a) (ii))
Offside Rear Tyre has a bulge, caused by separation or partial failure of its structure (5.2.3 (d) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Windscreen wiper blade defective BOTH (3.4 (b) (i))
Nearside Rear Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Offside Rear Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Rear Brakes imbalanced across an axle Axle 2 (1.2.1 (b) (i))
Service brake efficiency below requirements (1.2.2 (a) (i))
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Rear Rear fog lamp not working (4.5.1 (a) (ii))
Reversing lamp inoperative (4.6.1 (a))
Windscreen wiper blade defective BOTH (3.4 (b) (i))
Offside Front Seat belt slightly damaged (7.1.2 (b) (i))
Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Nearside Rear Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Offside Rear Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Parking brake lever has excessive movement indicating incorrect adjustment (1.1.6 (c))
Steering linkage ball joint ball joint dust cover excessively damaged or deteriorated so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt DROP ARM BOOT (2.1.3 (g) (ii))
Offside Front Seat belt slightly damaged (7.1.2 (b) (i))
Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Brake pipe excessively corroded (1.1.11 (c))
Drag link end ball joint has excessive play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Front Bumper insecure (6.1.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Brake pipe excessively corroded (1.1.11 (c))
Offside Front Brake pipe leaking on an air braking system (1.1.11 (b) (i))
Shock absorbers has an excessively worn bush BOTH REAR SHOCK BUSHES TOP AND BOTTOM (5.3.2 (c))
Rear brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)
Tyre worn close to the legal limit both rear (4.1.E.1)
Front registration plate insecure (6.3.1b)
Tyre worn close to the legal limit both rear (4.1.E.1)
How Reliable is the Land Rover Defender?
Based on 2,960,045 MOT tests across 181,953 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.
CT60 EEO is a 2010 Land Rover Defender in Blue with a 2,495cc diesel engine. This vehicle has been through 21 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 61.9%.
Across all 2010 Land Rover Defender models, the average MOT pass rate is 77.0% with a typical mileage of 58,096 miles. This particular vehicle has a lower pass rate than the average for its year, which may indicate maintenance issues worth investigating.
The most common reason a Land Rover Defender fails its MOT is shock absorber has an excessively worn bush, accounting for 77,499 recorded failures. If you're considering buying CT60 EEO, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Land Rover Defender typically stays on UK roads for around 43 years. At 16 years old, this Land Rover Defender is still in the earlier part of its expected life.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of CT60 EEO?
You can check the full history of CT60 EEO by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was CT60 EEO registered?
CT60 EEO is a 2010 Land Rover Defender, first registered on 30 December 2010.
Is CT60 EEO safe to buy?
The MOT history for CT60 EEO shows 21 tests with a 61.9% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does CT60 EEO 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 CT60 EEO. 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.