MOT Status
ValidMileage
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 Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement both sides (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Integral body structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced outer sill (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Nearside Rear Rear reflector defective or damaged by up to 50% of the reflecting surface (4.8.1 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Parking brake lever has excessive movement indicating incorrect adjustment (1.1.6 (c))
Windscreen washer not working (3.5 (a))
Front Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement both sides (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Integral body structure is corroded but structural rigidity is not significantly reduced outer sill (6.1.1 (c) (i))
Nearside Rear Rear reflector defective or damaged by up to 50% of the reflecting surface (4.8.1 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Central Exhaust mounting defective (6.1.2 (a))
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Rear Outer Suspension component mounting prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive sill (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Offside Front Suspension arm 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))
bolt not fully tight in lower engine mounting
parking brake lever travel long and slight side to side play
Exhaust mounting defective (6.1.2 (a))
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Nearside Rear Outer Suspension component mounting prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive sill (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
bolt loose on lower engine mounting
Front Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (1.1.13 (a) (ii)) DANGEROUS
Exhaust mounting defective (6.1.2 (a))
Front Brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (1.1.14 (a) (ii))
Nearside Rear Outer Suspension component mounting prescribed area is corroded but not considered excessive sill (5.3.6 (a) (i))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
bolt loose on lower engine mounting
Both rear drum brake backplates have their inspection covers missing
Central Exhaust mounting defective (6.1.2 (a))
Central Lower engine mounting bracket has one loose bolt but bracket secure
Gears very stiff to select - suspect cables.
Nearside Direction indicator slightly discoloured wing repeater (4.4.3 (a))
Nearside Front Lower Suspension arm pin or bush worn but not resulting in excessive movement inner rear bush (5.3.4 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Position lamp light intensity obviously reduced (4.2.3 (a) (i))
Nearside Front Track rod end ball joint dust cover damaged or deteriorated, but preventing the ingress of dirt (2.1.3 (g) (i))
Nearside Rear Tyre slightly damaged/cracking or perishing cracking in tread (5.2.3 (d) (ii))
Nearside Registration plate lamp inoperative in the case of multiple lamps or light sources (4.7.1 (b) (i))
Odometer and central LCD display completely blank
Offside Rear Tyre slightly damaged/cracking or perishing cracking in tread (5.2.3 (d) (ii))
Oil leak, but not excessive (8.4.1 (a) (i))
Rear Exhaust mounting defective rubber very perished and bracket heavily corroded (6.1.2 (a))
Spare wheel missing from carrier
Front Brake pad(s) wearing thin (1.1.13 (a) (ii))
Nearside Front Windscreen wiper blade defective (3.4 (b) (i))
Offside Front Upper Shock absorbers has a slightly worn bush (5.3.2 (c))
Rear Parking brake efficiency only just met. It would appear that the braking system requires adjustment or repair. (1.4.2 (a) (i))
Windscreen washer provides insufficient washer liquid (3.5 (a))
Nearside Rear Tyre has a tear, caused by separation or partial failure of its structure (5.2.3 (d) (ii))
Nearside Headlamp not working on main beam (4.1.1 (a) (ii))
Offside Front Direction indicator not working (4.4.1 (a) (ii))
Offside Front Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm 175/70r14 (4.1.E.1)
Nearside Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)
Nearside Front Macpherson strut has excessive movement at the upper attachment (2.5.A.1c)
Handbrake travel.
Nearside rear tyre slight wear on tread.
Nearside Rear Upper Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
Offside Front Macpherson strut has slight movement in the upper support bearing assembly (2.5.B.1b)
Offside Rear Upper Shock absorber has a slightly worn bush (2.7.4)
May be very slight bearing noise NSR but does not feel rough when rotated
Nearside Rear Road wheel distorted (4.2.A.1a) DANGEROUS
May be very slight bearing noise NSR but does not feel rough when rotated
How Reliable is the Citroen Nemo?
Based on 279,608 MOT tests across 21,949 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.
RJ09 MKN is a 2009 Citroen Nemo in White with a 1,396cc diesel engine. This vehicle has been through 20 MOT tests with a personal pass rate of 65%.
Across all 2009 Citroen Nemo models, the average MOT pass rate is 71.1% with a typical mileage of 76,934 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 Citroen Nemo fails its MOT is tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm, accounting for 4,767 recorded failures. If you're considering buying RJ09 MKN, it's worth having these areas checked by a mechanic before committing.
The Citroen Nemo typically stays on UK roads for around 18 years. At 17 years old, this Citroen Nemo is approaching the upper end of the typical lifespan for this model.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I check the history of RJ09 MKN?
You can check the full history of RJ09 MKN by running a full vehicle check. This shows you finance, stolen, write-off, MOT history, mileage records and more.
What year was RJ09 MKN registered?
RJ09 MKN is a 2009 Citroen Nemo, first registered on 31 July 2009.
Is RJ09 MKN safe to buy?
The MOT history for RJ09 MKN shows 20 tests with a 65% pass rate. To check for outstanding finance, stolen markers, write-off history and mileage discrepancies, run a full vehicle check.
Does RJ09 MKN 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 RJ09 MKN. 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.