MOT Status
ValidMileage
135,589 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 pad(s) wearing thin discs worn also (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Exhaust hydrocarbon content after 2nd fast idle exceeds manufacturer's specified limits (8.2.1.2 (a))
Central Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Brake disc worn, but not excessively (1.1.14 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Inner Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Offside Front Brake disc worn, but not excessively (1.1.14 (a) (i))
Offside Front Inner Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Front differential has slight leak
Nearside Front Fog lamp lens damaged
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover severely deteriorated (5.3.4 (b) (i))
Offside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Offside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover severely deteriorated (5.3.4 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Surface corrosion to underside of car
Electrical wiring insecure and connectors likely to become disconnected Positive Battery terminal (4.11 (a) (ii))
Front differential has slight leak
Nearside Front Fog lamp lens damaged
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover severely deteriorated (5.3.4 (b) (i))
Offside Front Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Offside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover severely deteriorated (5.3.4 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material (1.1.11 (c))
Surface corrosion to underside of car
Central Front Oil leak, but not excessive Front differential leaking. (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Fog lamp lens broken.
Offside Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Rear Registration plate does not conform to the specified requirements (0.1 (d))
Rear Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
surface corrosion underside
Offside Rear Lower Suspension arm pin or bush excessively worn hub bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Nail in tyre
Rear Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
surface corrosion underside
Nearside Rear Brake pipe corroded, covered in grease or other material to brake flexy (1.1.11 (c))
Rear Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
surface corrossion underside
Rear Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Offside Front Brake pipe excessively corroded to rear (3.6.B.2c)
Rear fog lamp not working (1.3.2b)
Rear fog lamp switch faulty (1.3.1a)
Service brake: efficiency below requirements (3.7.B.7)
Nearside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1) DANGEROUS
Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
slight play in offside rear lower hub bush
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)
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover excessively deteriorated so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Anti-roll bar has excessive play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover excessively deteriorated so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Anti-roll bar has excessive play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
surface corrosion on outer sills
Brake pedal spongy (3.3.B.1b)
Nearside Front Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (3.5.1g)
surface corrosion on outer sills
Offside Rear Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Track rod end ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.2.C.1c)
Nearside Front Tyre has ply or cords exposed (4.1.D.1b) DANGEROUS
Front Headlamp aim too low (1.8)
Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Rear Lower Suspension arm has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Tyre has a bulge, caused by separation or partial failure of its structure (4.1.D.1b)
o/s/f tyre close to inner wing liner on lock
Exhaust emissions carbon monoxide content after 2nd fast idle excessive (7.3.D.3)
Exhaust emissions carbon monoxide content at idle excessive (7.3.D.4)
o/s/f tyre close to inner wing liner on lock
Rear Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Headlamp aim too high when the centre of the headlamp is below 850mm from the ground (1.6.B2)
How Reliable is the Mitsubishi Lancer?
Based on 382,912 MOT tests across 33,260 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.
E24 EVO is a 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer in Grey with a 1,990cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 31 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 64.5%.
Across all 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer models, the average MOT pass rate is 75.5% with a typical mileage of 60,560 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 Mitsubishi Lancer fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 9,095 recorded failures. If you're considering buying E24 EVO, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Mitsubishi Lancer typically stays on UK roads for around 30 years. At 21 years old, this Mitsubishi Lancer is well into its expected lifespan but still has years ahead.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of E24 EVO?
You can check the full history of E24 EVO by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was E24 EVO registered?
E24 EVO is a 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer, first registered on 3 August 2005.
Is E24 EVO safe to buy?
The MOT history for E24 EVO shows 31 tests with a 64.5% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does E24 EVO 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 E24 EVO. 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.