Ford Transit 2012: reliability & common MOT faults
Elevated MOT failure patterns for the 2012 Ford Transit include Leaf spring (rear) (~85.7× peers) and Rigid brake pipes (front) (~11.1× peers). Based on UK DVSA open data for test year 2025 (6,414 failed first-attempt tests), compared with similar age and mileage peers. Available test years: 2024, 2025.
Common faults
These are MOT failure patterns that show up more often on this registration year than on similar cars of the same class, age band, and mileage in the same test year (leave-one-out peer comparison; whole model family excluded).
Statistical patterns from MOT defect codes — not manufacturer TSBs, recalls, or a diagnosis of any individual car. Fail and advisory patterns are kept separate.
Based on 6,414 failed first-attempt tests in test year 2025.
Leaf spring (rear)
This failure pattern appears about 85.7× more often than on similar peer cars — recorded on 537 failed first-attempt tests; 8.4% of failed tests for this model year.
Rear · 537 failures · ×85.7 vs similar cars · 8.4% of failed first tests · Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars
Rigid brake pipes (front)
This failure pattern appears about 11.1× more often than on similar peer cars — recorded on 471 failed first-attempt tests; 7.3% of failed tests for this model year.
Front · 471 failures · ×11.1 vs similar cars · 7.3% of failed first tests · Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars
Chassis condition (rear)
This failure pattern appears about 9.8× more often than on similar peer cars — recorded on 138 failed first-attempt tests; 2.2% of failed tests for this model year.
Rear · 138 failures · ×9.8 vs similar cars · 2.2% of failed first tests · Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars
| # | Fault pattern | Location | Failures | vs similar cars | Share of fails | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Leaf spring (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Leaf springs > Leaf spring
|
Rear | 537 | ×85.7 | 8.4% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 2 |
Rigid brake pipes (front)
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
|
Front | 471 | ×11.1 | 7.3% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 3 |
Chassis condition (rear)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
|
Rear | 138 | ×9.8 | 2.2% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 4 |
Rigid brake pipes
Brakes > Rigid brake pipes
|
Any | 235 | ×9.6 | 3.7% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 5 |
Component mounting prescribed areas (rear)
Suspension > Component mounting prescribed areas
|
Rear | 455 | ×9.6 | 7.1% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 6 |
Wheel bearings (front)
Suspension > Wheel bearings
|
Front | 405 | ×4.9 | 6.3% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 7 |
Drive shafts — Joints
Body, chassis, structure > Transmission > Drive shafts > Joints
|
Any | 163 | ×4.8 | 2.5% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 8 |
Registration plate lamp(s)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Registration plate lamp(s)
|
Any | 1,200 | ×4.6 | 18.7% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 9 |
Reversing lamps
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Reversing lamps > Reversing lamps
|
Any | 189 | ×4.6 | 2.9% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 10 |
Registration plate lamp(s) (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Registration plate lamp(s)
|
Rear | 596 | ×3.7 | 9.3% | Likely common fault pattern |
Only patterns that clear minimum sample and elevation thresholds are shown (at least 20 failures and 2.0× peer lift).
Wear patterns
These patterns look like wear or usage effects rather than model-specific design faults. Tyres, brake friction material, and alignment-related defects often track mileage and road use. They are not treated as a model design fault in our common-faults ranking.
| # | Pattern | Location | Failures | vs similar cars | Share of fails | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Brake pads
Brakes > Mechanical brake components > Brake linings and pads > Brake pads
|
Any | 20 | ×3.1 | 0.3% | Wear / usage pattern — not treated as a model design fault |
Advisories
Advisory items recorded on failed first-attempt tests that appear elevated versus peers. Advisories are not a fail rate — they flag issues noted at the test, often before they become failures.
| # | Advisory pattern | Location | Notes | vs similar cars | Share | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Anchor pins and bushes (rear)
Suspension > Springs > Leaf springs > Anchor pins and bushes
|
Rear | 21 | ×35.4 | 0.3% | Elevated vs peers |
| 2 |
Pipes and hoses (front)
Steering > Power steering > Pipes and hoses
|
Front | 97 | ×27.2 | 1.5% | Possible elevated fault |
| 3 |
Prescribed areas (front)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems > Seat belts > Prescribed areas
|
Front | 35 | ×22.4 | 0.5% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 4 |
Pipes and hoses
Steering > Power steering > Pipes and hoses
|
Any | 180 | ×22.2 | 2.8% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 5 |
Integral vehicle structure condition (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Integral vehicle structure > Integral vehicle structure condition
|
Front | 119 | ×13.8 | 1.9% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 6 |
Position lamp (rear)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment > Position lamps > Position lamp
|
Rear | 66 | ×13.8 | 1.0% | Likely common fault pattern |
| 7 |
Chassis condition (front)
Body, chassis, structure > Chassis > Chassis condition
|
Front | 94 | ×12.4 | 1.5% | Strong pattern — appears far more often than similar cars |
| 8 |
Seat belts — Condition
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems > Seat belts > Condition
|
Any | 63 | ×12.0 | 1.0% | Elevated vs peers |
FAQs
About this data
Universe. UK class 4 cars only; normal MOT tests (not retests); results pass, PRS, or fail; one first test per vehicle per calendar year.
PRS policy. PRS means the vehicle 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.
Peer baseline. We compare this model year with other class 4 cars of similar age and mileage in the same test year, excluding the whole model family so the car is not compared with itself (leave-one-out peer baseline).
Data years. Test years covered: 2024, 2025.
Limitations.
- MOT tests do not cover engine internals, gearboxes, or many electronic modules — so this is not a full reliability score.
- Common faults are inferred from MOT defect statistics, not manufacturer TSBs or recalls.
- Matching on age and mileage reduces but does not remove every usage or maintenance difference between cars.
- Pass rates and star scores appear only when those data marts are available; this page never invents them.
Display rules config: 1
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.