Model Reports 8 min read Updated 13 Jul 2026

Fiat Punto 2009: reliability & common MOT faults

On the 2009 Fiat Punto, MOT failures for Sub-frame (front) and Exhaust system (front) show up more often than on similar cars of the same age and mileage. Figures come from UK DVSA open data for tests in 2025 (2,466 failed first-attempt tests). Figures are among first-attempt failed MOT tests, not among all tests.

Sample

2,466 failed first-attempt tests · 5,886 first tests (test year 2025)

Standout pattern

Sub-frame (front) — about 8.5× more often than on similar cars.

What to check

  • Sub-frame (front) — about 8.5× more often than similar cars
  • Exhaust system (front) — about 5.1× more often than similar cars
  • Catalyst emissions — about 3.8× more often than similar cars

Common faults

Failure patterns that show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars.

These MOT failure patterns show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars of the same class, age, and mileage.

Based on 2,466 failed first-attempt tests in 2025.

Sub-frame (front)

This failure pattern appears about 8.5× more often than on similar cars — recorded on 135 failed first-attempt tests; 5.5% of failed tests for this model year.

Front 135 failures ×8.5 5.5% of failed first tests Strong

Exhaust system (front)

This failure pattern appears about 5.1× more often than on similar cars — recorded on 139 failed first-attempt tests; 5.6% of failed tests for this model year.

Front 139 failures ×5.1 5.6% of failed first tests Strong

# Fault pattern Location Failures vs similar cars Share of fails Confidence
1 Sub-frame (front)
Suspension > Sub-frames > Sub-frame
 Front 135 ×8.5 5.5% Strong
2 Exhaust system (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Exhaust system
 Front 139 ×5.1 5.6% Strong
3 Catalyst emissions
Noise, emissions and leaks > Exhaust emissions > Spark ignition > Catalyst emissions
 Any 427 ×3.8 17.3% Likely
4 Emissions not tested
Noise, emissions and leaks > Exhaust emissions > Spark ignition > Emissions not tested
 Any 123 ×3.1 5.0% Likely
5 Shock absorbers (rear)
Suspension > Shock absorbers
 Rear 188 ×2.8 7.6% Possible
6 Position lamp (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Position lamps > Position lamp
 Rear 167 ×2.5 6.8% Possible
7 Individual direction indicators (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Direction indicators > Flashing type > Individual direction indicators
 Rear 123 ×2.4 5.0% Possible
8 Individual direction indicators (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Direction indicators > Flashing type > Individual direction indicators
 Front 54 ×2.4 2.2% Possible

Only patterns that clear minimum sample and elevation thresholds are shown (at least 20 failures and about 2.0× more often than similar cars).

Note: Rates and comparisons are among first-attempt failed tests, not all MOTs. Patterns come from MOT defect codes — not manufacturer service bulletins, recalls, or a diagnosis of any individual car. Failures and advisories are listed separately.

Advisories

Notes recorded at the test that appear more often than on similar cars.

Advisory notes recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear more often than on similar cars.

# Advisory pattern Location Notes vs similar cars Share Confidence
1 Position lamp (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Position lamps > Position lamp
 Rear 31 ×9.3 1.3% Possible
2 Individual direction indicators (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Direction indicators > Flashing type > Individual direction indicators
 Front 70 ×3.8 2.8% Possible
3 Transmission oil leaks (front)
Noise, emissions and leaks > Fluid leaks > Transmission oil leaks
 Front 112 ×3.8 4.5% Elevated
4 Shock absorbers (rear)
Suspension > Shock absorbers
 Rear 235 ×2.9 9.5% Possible
5 Headlamp (front)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Headlamps > Headlamp
 Front 98 ×2.5 4.0% Elevated
6 Seat belts — Condition (rear)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems > Seat belts > Condition
 Rear 36 ×2.4 1.5% Elevated
7 Coil spring (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Coil springs > Coil spring
 Rear 495 ×2.3 20.1% Elevated
8 Exhaust system (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Exhaust system
 Front 106 ×2.1 4.3% Strong
Note: Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.

FAQs

Short answers about how to read this model-year guide.

We do not show a single reliability score for the 2009 Fiat Punto on this page. Among 2,466 failed first-attempt MOT tests (test year 2025), Sub-frame (front) appears more often than on similar cars (about 8.5× more often than similar cars; 135 observed failures; 5.5% of failed tests). Treat this as a pre-purchase checklist from DVSA open data — not a guarantee for any individual car.
Among failed first-attempt tests we highlight patterns that appear more often than on similar cars. Top example: Sub-frame (front) (about 8.5× more often than similar cars; 135 observed failures; 5.5% of failed tests). These are statistical signals, not a diagnosis of any individual car.
Sub-frame (front) shows up more often than on similar cars (about 8.5× more often than similar cars; 135 observed failures; 5.5% of failed tests). That does not prove a design fault — age, mileage, and how the car was used still matter. Treat it as a pre-purchase check point, not a manufacturer service bulletin.
Common MOT problem areas for the 2009 Fiat Punto include Sub-frame (front), Exhaust system (front), Catalyst emissions. These patterns show up more often than on similar cars after we filter out sparse noise — not a full list of every possible fault on an individual car.
Advisories flag issues noted at the test and are not a fail rate. We show advisory patterns that appear more often than on similar cars among failed first-attempt tests, separate from common failure rows. Use them as early-warning checks, not as a pass/fail score.
This page highlights MOT failure patterns for the 2009 Fiat Punto (registration year) using UK DVSA open data for the selected test year. Patterns are compared with cars of a similar age and mileage. It is a buyer checklist from MOT defect statistics — not a full service history or manufacturer service-bulletin list.
No. MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules. Patterns here come from MOT defect statistics only and should not be read as engine or gearbox reliability scores.
PRS means the car failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

About this data

How this page is built and what it can (and can't) say.

These figures come from UK MOT open data for this model year. We surface common failure patterns against similar cars — not a full reliability score, and not a pass/fail verdict on any individual vehicle.

2024 2025

What we include

UK Class 4 cars only. Normal MOT tests (not retests); first test per vehicle per calendar year; results pass, PRS, or fail.

Same-day repairs

PRS means the car failed items that were fixed at the test station and then passed the same day. We count PRS as a first-attempt fail in headline rates so same-day repairs do not hide problems.

How we compare

We compare this model year with other Class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year. This model family is left out of the peer group so the car is not measured against itself.

What this does not cover

  • MOTs do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronics — this is not a full reliability score.
  • Common faults come from MOT defect stats, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
  • Age and mileage matching reduces — but does not remove — differences in how cars were used and maintained.
  • We never invent pass rates, star scores, or ranks when those data marts are missing.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Most reliable Fiat models

See brand-wide MOT rankings and year guidance for Fiat (separate from this model-year report).