MOT Status
ValidMileage
198,067 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
Central Exhaust has a minor leak of exhaust gases (6.1.2 (a))
Exhaust corroded
Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Windscreen wiper blade defective (3.4 (b) (i))
Nearside Front Outer Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Rear Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
surface corrosion underbody vehicle
Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Rear Brake lining(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Rear Exhaust has a minor leak of exhaust gases (6.1.2 (a))
Rear Registration plate lamp inoperative in the case of multiple lamps or light sources (4.7.1 (b) (i))
Exhaust has a minor leak of exhaust gases (6.1.2 (a))
Rear Brake lining(s) wearing thin both (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Rear Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Play in steering rack inner joint(s) ()
Nearside Headlamp aim too high (4.1.2 (a))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Play in steering rack inner joint(s) ()
Front Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened (2.4.G.1)
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Radius arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Radius arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened (2.4.G.1)
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Front Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Radius arm corroded but not seriously weakened 2 (2.4.G.1)
Oil leak ()
Rear Radius arm corroded but not seriously weakened 2 (2.4.G.1)
Front Tyre has a tear, caused by separation or partial failure of its structure 2 (4.1.D.1b)
Nearside Rear Panhard rod rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Panhard rod rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Radius arm corroded but not seriously weakened 2 (2.4.G.1)
Oil leak ()
Rear Radius arm corroded but not seriously weakened 2 (2.4.G.1)
Front Anti-roll bar rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front wheel bearing has slight play (2.5.A.3c)
Play in steering rack inner joint(s)
Rear Trailing arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
exhaust corroded
Offside Rear Direction indicator incorrect colour (1.4.A.2f)
Exhaust emissions carbon monoxide content after 2nd fast idle excessive (7.3.D.3)
Nearside Rear Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Front position lamp(s) not working (1.1.A.3b)
Offside Rear Rear position lamp(s) not working (1.1.A.3b)
Nearside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Parking brake: parking brake efficiency only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (3.7.B.7)
Parking brake: parking brake efficiency only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (3.7.B.7)
How Reliable is the Volvo 240?
Based on 134,955 MOT tests across 18,976 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.
K32 VFK is a 1993 Volvo 240 in White with a 1,986cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 23 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 78.3%.
Across all 1993 Volvo 240 models, the average MOT pass rate is 66.4% with a typical mileage of 139,510 miles. This particular vehicle has performed better than the average for its year.
The most common reason a Volvo 240 fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 6,198 recorded failures. If you're considering buying K32 VFK, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Volvo 240 typically stays on UK roads for around 47 years. At 33 years old, this Volvo 240 is well into its expected lifespan but still has years ahead.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of K32 VFK?
You can check the full history of K32 VFK by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was K32 VFK registered?
K32 VFK is a 1993 Volvo 240, first registered on 26 March 1993.
Is K32 VFK safe to buy?
The MOT history for K32 VFK shows 23 tests with a 78.3% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does K32 VFK 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 K32 VFK. 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.