MOT Status
ValidMileage
139,819 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
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened Both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened Both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened All (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Shock absorbers has a reduced damping effect Both (5.3.2 (d))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Vehicle structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Brake disc worn, but not excessively All (1.1.14 (a) (i))
Integral body structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Rear Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint has slight play Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Brake disc worn, but not excessively All (1.1.14 (a) (i))
Front Lower Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint has slight play (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Vehicle structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm ball joint excessively worn (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Exhaust system insecure (6.1.2 (a))
Brake disc worn, but not excessively All (1.1.14 (a) (i))
Front Lower Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint has slight play (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Vehicle structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened Both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Front Lower Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Anti-roll bar pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened Both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Parking brake efficiency less than 50% of the required value (1.4.2 (a) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened Both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Front Lower Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Anti-roll bar pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement Both (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Rear Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened Both (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Rear Suspension arm corroded but not seriously weakened Both (5.3.3 (b) (i))
Nearside Front Drag link end ball joint has slight play drumstick (2.1.3 (b) (i))
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to legal limit/worn on edge (5.2.3 (e))
Offside Front Tyre worn close to legal limit/worn on edge (5.2.3 (e))
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Registration plate lamp insecure (1.1.C.1c)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
How Reliable is the Volvo S60?
Based on 758,165 MOT tests across 54,544 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.
OU52 XSL is a 2002 Volvo S60 in Red with a 1,984cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 22 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 86.4%.
Across all 2002 Volvo S60 models, the average MOT pass rate is 69.5% with a typical mileage of 99,133 miles. This particular vehicle has performed better than the average for its year.
The most common reason a Volvo S60 fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 28,009 recorded failures. If you're considering buying OU52 XSL, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Volvo S60 typically stays on UK roads for around 26 years. At 24 years old, this Volvo S60 is approaching the upper end of the typical lifespan for this model.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of OU52 XSL?
You can check the full history of OU52 XSL by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was OU52 XSL registered?
OU52 XSL is a 2002 Volvo S60, first registered on 10 September 2002.
Is OU52 XSL safe to buy?
The MOT history for OU52 XSL shows 22 tests with a 86.4% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does OU52 XSL 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 OU52 XSL. 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.