MOT Status
ExpiredMileage
90,265 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
Fuel cap/sealing device does not fasten securely maintaining the sealing arrangement (7.2.4b)
Nearside Headlamp aim beam image obviously incorrect (1.8.A.1b)
Nearside Rear Inner Suspension component mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded sill (2.4.A.3)
Rear Brakes imbalanced across an axle Axle 2 (3.7.B.5b)
Nearside Front Outer Front constant velocity joint gaiter damaged, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.5.C.1a)
Nearside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Offside Front Seat belt stitching slightly frayed (5.2.2b)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Rear Exhaust has a minor leak of exhaust gases (7.1.2)
Oil leak
Rear end of car corroded
Fuel cap/sealing device does not fasten securely maintaining the sealing arrangement (7.2.4b)
Nearside Front Headlamp aim beam image obviously incorrect (1.8.A.1b)
Nearside Front Lower Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover excessively deteriorated so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover excessively damaged so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Macpherson strut has excessive movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Nearside Rear Trailing arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Front Lower Anti-roll bar linkage ball joint dust cover excessively deteriorated so that it no longer prevents the ingress of dirt (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Macpherson strut has excessive movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Offside Rear Trailing arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Nearside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Offside Front Seat belt stitching slightly frayed (5.2.2b)
Offside Front Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Rear Exhaust has a minor leak of exhaust gases (7.1.2)
Oil leak
Rear end of car corroded
Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Exhaust emissions Lambda reading after 2nd fast idle outside specified limits (7.3.D.3)
Exhaust emissions carbon monoxide content after 2nd fast idle excessive (7.3.D.3)
Nearside Outer Seat belt anchorage prescribed area is excessively corroded (5.2.6)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Brake hose has slight corrosion to ferrules (3.6.B.4e)
Nearside Front Suspension arm ball joint dust cover damaged, but preventing the ingress of dirt (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 has slight play in a pin/bush (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Nearside Rear Macpherson strut has slight movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Offside Rear Macpherson strut has slight movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Oil leak
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
wiper blades deteriorated
Offside Front Subframe mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded (2.4.A.3)
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Nearside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
Offside Front Lower Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated but not resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)
Offside Rear Brake pipe slightly corroded (3.6.B.2c)
wiper blades deteriorated
Coolant leak
Nearside Rear Brake pipe excessively corroded (3.6.B.2c)
advise front brake pads over half worn
advise rear brake check and adjust
nail in tyre
off side rear
How Reliable is the Ford Puma?
Based on 713,333 MOT tests across 56,808 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.
R665 XFC is a 1997 Ford Puma in Red with a 1,679cc petrol engine. This vehicle has been through 12 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 58.3%.
Across all 1997 Ford Puma models, the average MOT pass rate is 61.2% with a typical mileage of 65,014 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 Ford Puma fails its MOT is brake pipe excessively corroded, accounting for 62,649 recorded failures. If you're considering buying R665 XFC, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Ford Puma typically stays on UK roads for around 29 years. At 29 years old, this Ford Puma is approaching the upper end of the typical lifespan for this model.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of R665 XFC?
You can check the full history of R665 XFC by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was R665 XFC registered?
R665 XFC is a 1997 Ford Puma, first registered on 30 November 1997.
Is R665 XFC safe to buy?
The MOT history for R665 XFC shows 12 tests with a 58.3% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does R665 XFC 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 R665 XFC. 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.