MOT Status
ExpiredMileage
139,904 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
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Front Anti-roll bar has excessive play in a pin/bush Both D bushes (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Headlamp aim beam image obviously incorrect (1.8.A.1b)
Supplementary Restraint System warning lamp indicates a fault (5.4.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Inner Front Anti-roll bar has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Inner Front Anti-roll bar has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Rear Brakes imbalanced requirements only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (3.7.B.5b)
Brakes imbalanced across an axle (3.7.B.5b)
Offside Front Windscreen wiper does not clear the windscreen effectively (8.2.2)
Offside Rear rear brake recording little or no effort (3.7.B.5a)
Offside Rear rear brake recording little or no effort (3.7.B.5a)
Parking brake: efficiency below requirements (3.7.B.7)
Supplementary Restraint System warning lamp indicates a fault (5.4.2)
Nearside Inner Front Anti-roll bar has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Inner Front Anti-roll bar has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Front Anti-roll bar synthetic 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)
both front lower suspension arm rubber bushes perishing
both rear brake pipes slightly corroded
Nearside Front Tyre has a lump, caused by separation or partial failure of its structure (4.1.D.1b)
Nearside Headlamp aim beam image obviously incorrect (1.8.A.1b)
Offside Headlamp aim beam image obviously incorrect (1.8.A.1b)
Front Anti-roll bar synthetic 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)
both front lower suspension arm rubber bushes perishing
both rear brake pipes slightly corroded
Front Anti-roll bar has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Inner Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Front Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Supplementary Restraint System warning lamp indicates a fault (5.4.2)
Front Anti-roll bar has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Inner Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Front Headlamp excessively deteriorated so that the light output is severely reduced (1.7.5a)
Nearside Front coil spring fractured (2.4.C.1a)
Offside Front Headlamp excessively deteriorated so that the light output is severely reduced (1.7.5a)
Offside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)
Offside Front coil spring fractured (2.4.C.1a)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Centre Exhaust has a major leak of exhaust gases (7.1.2)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
How Reliable is the Ford Mondeo?
Based on 12,239,875 MOT tests across 1,205,291 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.
K653 UDG is a 1993 Ford Mondeo in Blue with a 1,597cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 16 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 62.5%.
Across all 1993 Ford Mondeo models, the average MOT pass rate is 61.9% with a typical mileage of 112,344 miles. This particular vehicle has performed better than the average for its year.
The most common reason a Ford Mondeo fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 610,562 recorded failures. If you're considering buying K653 UDG, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Ford Mondeo typically stays on UK roads for around 33 years. At 33 years old, this Ford Mondeo is approaching the upper end of the typical lifespan for this model.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of K653 UDG?
You can check the full history of K653 UDG by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was K653 UDG registered?
K653 UDG is a 1993 Ford Mondeo, first registered on 12 May 1993.
Is K653 UDG safe to buy?
The MOT history for K653 UDG shows 16 tests with a 62.5% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does K653 UDG 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 K653 UDG. 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.