MOT Status
ExpiredMileage
75,187 miAbove average mileage for this year
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 Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
General corrosion underneath
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Headlamp insecure (4.1.1 (c))
Nearside Front Tyre has ply or cords exposed (5.2.3 (d) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Front Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
General corrosion underneath
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Inner Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Front Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Nearside Front Outer Tyre worn close to legal limit/worn on edge (5.2.3 (e))
Nearside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area damaged but not considered excessive (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Offside Direction indicator insecure (4.4.1 (c) (i))
Offside Front Direction indicator lens defective which has no effect on emitted light (4.4.1 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area damaged but not considered excessive (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Offside Seat belt anchorage prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive (7.1.1 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Windscreen wiper blade defective (3.4 (b) (i))
both rear axle swivel pins and bushes swivel pin and/or bush slightly worn
Bumper damaged and likely to cause injury when grazed or contacted (6.1.4 (a) (i))
Exhaust Lambda reading after 2nd fast idle outside specified limits (8.2.1.2 (c))
Front Brakes imbalanced across an axle Axle 1 (1.2.1 (b) (i))
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (5.3.4 (b) (ii))
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint excessively worn (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Nearside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (3.4 (b) (ii))
Offside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Offside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (3.4 (b) (ii))
Parking brake efficiency below requirements (1.4.2 (a) (i))
Rear Wheel bearing has excessive play (5.1.3 (a) (i))
Service brake efficiency below requirements (1.2.2 (a) (i))
Steering rack gaiter missing or no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.1.3 (g) (ii))
Front Inner Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Front Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Nearside Front Outer Tyre worn close to legal limit/worn on edge (5.2.3 (e))
Nearside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area damaged but not considered excessive (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Offside Direction indicator insecure (4.4.1 (c) (i))
Offside Front Direction indicator lens defective which has no effect on emitted light (4.4.1 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Suspension component mounting prescribed area damaged but not considered excessive (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Offside Seat belt anchorage prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive (7.1.1 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Windscreen wiper blade defective (3.4 (b) (i))
both rear axle swivel pins and bushes swivel pin and/or bush slightly worn
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm ball joint dust cover severely deteriorated (5.3.4 (b) (i))
Nearside Rear Axle swivel pins and bushes swivel pin and/or bush slightly worn (5.1.2 (b) (i))
Nearside Rear Outer Vehicle structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced seal (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Offside Front Direction indicator lens defective which has no effect on emitted light (4.4.1 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Axle swivel pins and bushes swivel pin and/or bush slightly worn (5.1.2 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Inner Vehicle structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced seal (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Oil leak ()
Nearside Front Front constant velocity joint gaiter damaged to the extent that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt etc (2.5.C.1a)
Oil leak ()
Horn not working (1.6.2a)
Nearside Rear Stop lamp not working (1.2.1b)
Rear Registration plate lamp not working (1.1.C.1d)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
rear bumper & tailgate damage
Oil leak
Nearside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm has excessive play in a ball joint (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front constant velocity joint gaiter damaged to the extent that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt etc (2.5.C.1a)
Offside Headlamp not working on main beam (1.7.5a)
Offside Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
Oil leak
Oil leak
How Reliable is the Mazda Demio?
Based on 136,409 MOT tests across 10,090 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.
DG51 FNP is a 2002 Mazda Demio in Red with a 1,323cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 22 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 77.3%.
Across all 2002 Mazda Demio models, the average MOT pass rate is 74.2% with a typical mileage of 54,250 miles. This particular vehicle has performed better than the average for its year.
The most common reason a Mazda Demio fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 7,070 recorded failures. If you're considering buying DG51 FNP, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Mazda Demio typically stays on UK roads for around 28 years. At 24 years old, this Mazda Demio is approaching the upper end of the typical lifespan for this model.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of DG51 FNP?
You can check the full history of DG51 FNP by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was DG51 FNP registered?
DG51 FNP is a 2002 Mazda Demio, first registered on 30 January 2002.
Is DG51 FNP safe to buy?
The MOT history for DG51 FNP shows 22 tests with a 77.3% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does DG51 FNP 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 DG51 FNP. 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.