MOT Status
ValidMileage
91,197 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 Anti-roll bar linkage pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (Both sides) (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Track rod end ball joint has slight play (Both sides) (2.1.3 (b) (i))
General surface rust all under the body
Front Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint has slight play (BOTH) (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (ENGINE) (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Brake disc in such a condition that it is seriously weakened (BOTH) (1.1.14 (a) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Front Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint has slight play (BOTH) (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (ENGINE) (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Anti-roll bar linkage pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both sides (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Front Service brake fluctuating, but not excessively (1.2.1 (e))
Front Steering rack gaiter damaged or deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt Both sides (2.1.3 (g) (i))
Nearside Rear Registration plate lamp inoperative in the case of multiple lamps or light sources (4.7.1 (b) (i))
Offside Front Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to legal limit/worn on edge (5.2.3 (e))
Rear Service brake imbalance requirements only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (1.2.1 (b) (i))
Front Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Front Steering rack gaiter damaged or deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt Both sides (2.1.3 (g) (i))
Offside Front Track rod end ball joint has slight play (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Nearside Front Upper Macpherson strut pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Upper Macpherson strut pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Stop lamp(s) all not working (4.3.1 (a) (iii)) DANGEROUS
Nearside Front Upper Macpherson strut pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Upper Macpherson strut pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Registration plate deteriorated but not likely to be misread (0.1 (b))
Nearside Front Upper Macpherson strut pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Front Inner Tyre worn close to legal limit/worn on edge edge (5.2.3 (e))
Offside Front Upper Macpherson strut pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin Approx / 3.0 mm (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Front Exhaust mounting defective Mounting broken / flex pipe deteriorated.. (6.1.2 (a))
Front Macpherson strut mounting damaged but not seriously weakened Both side , top mounting worn.. (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive Needs attention.. (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Offside Front Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm ball joint excessively worn (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm ball joint likely to become detached (5.3.4 (a) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Nearside Front Tyre has ply or cords exposed (5.2.3 (d) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Offside Front Tyre has ply or cords exposed (5.2.3 (d) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin Approx / 3.0 mm (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Front Exhaust mounting defective Mounting broken / flex pipe deteriorated.. (6.1.2 (a))
Front Macpherson strut mounting damaged but not seriously weakened Both side , top mounting worn.. (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive Needs attention.. (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm ball joint excessively worn (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Position lamp not working (4.2.1 (a))
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm ball joint excessively worn (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Offside Headlamp aim projected beam image is obviously incorrect (4.1.2 (c))
Brake pad(s) wearing thin both front (3.5.1g)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Nearside Rear Rear wheel bearing has slight play (2.6.2)
Offside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Offside Rear Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Brake pad(s) wearing thin (3.5.1g)
How Reliable is the Chevrolet Matiz?
Based on 487,981 MOT tests across 31,339 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.
LO59 XNV is a 2010 Chevrolet Matiz in Black with a 995cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 18 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 77.8%.
Across all 2010 Chevrolet Matiz models, the average MOT pass rate is 72.2% with a typical mileage of 36,750 miles. This particular vehicle has performed better than the average for its year.
The most common reason a Chevrolet Matiz fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 17,486 recorded failures. If you're considering buying LO59 XNV, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Chevrolet Matiz typically stays on UK roads for around 21 years. At 16 years old, this Chevrolet Matiz is well into its expected lifespan but still has years ahead.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of LO59 XNV?
You can check the full history of LO59 XNV by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was LO59 XNV registered?
LO59 XNV is a 2010 Chevrolet Matiz, first registered on 10 January 2010.
Is LO59 XNV safe to buy?
The MOT history for LO59 XNV shows 18 tests with a 77.8% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does LO59 XNV 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 LO59 XNV. 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.