MOT Risk Index.co.uk

Mercedes-Benz CLA — MOT statistics 2024

The Mercedes-Benz CLA failed 19.33% of 63,888 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 100.6 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car is too close to call — statistically indistinguishable from normal for its age.

MOT risk index 100.6, 95% CI 99.0–102.2 (100 = national average) 100 100.6 0 200
Index
100.6
100 = age-normal
Raw fail rate
19.33%
n = 63,888
Dangerous /100
11
national ≈11
Diesel − petrol
+4.0 pp
fail-rate gap
Rank
465 of 761
lower index = better

Age-adjusted peer: Mazda 2 (index 100.0) — the two published results are 0.6 index points apart.

Mercedes-Benz CLA common problems: what actually fails the MOT

Tyres stand out at 11.4 per 100 tests, against 7.2 per 100 tests across UK vehicles of the same ages.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

Mercedes-Benz CLA common problems: what actually fails the MOT — 2024 UK MOT data

family vs national — matched to UK vehicles of the same ages — top component groups, per 100 tests. Legend: This family · National avg. Combined labels: family / national average. A gap here reflects how these vehicles are driven, used and maintained as well as how they were built — an MOT defect is a test outcome, not a breakdown.

Component-group comparison table

Each ratio carries a 95% interval. With 6 groups compared here, roughly one apparent difference in twenty is chance alone, and 1 of these is already inside an interval that includes 1.00×.

GroupThis familyCases behind itUK, same agesFamily / national
Tyres11.429,5807.21.59×1.56–1.60
Visibility5.514,2215.51.01×0.99–1.02 · not distinguishable
Brakes3.89,9764.80.79×0.79–0.82
Suspension3.58,9854.30.81×0.78–0.82
Lamps & electrical2.66,8625.30.49×0.49–0.51
Emissions & leaks1.33,4031.11.16×1.13–1.21
Named defects — items per 100 initial tests, this family vs UK national average; this model measured on 260,294 tests, 2019-2024, national column 2024
What failedper 100 tests (this family)per 100 tests (UK average)ratio family / UKWhat to check
Tyre seriously damagedA tyre seriously damaged3.982.541.57×Check tyre tread depth across the full width
Tyre cords visible or damagedA tyre cords visible or damaged3.051.631.87×Check tyre tread depth across the full width
Engine MIL illuminated indicating a malfunctionEngine MIL illuminated indicating a malfunction1.101.190.93×Ask the seller about: Engine MIL illuminated indicating a malfunction
Wiper blade defectiveWiper blade defective1.071.260.85×Check wipers, washers and windscreen chips in the driver's view
Windscreen washers not working or not providing…Windscreen washers not working or not providing sufficient fluid to clear the windscreen1.191.620.73×Check wipers, washers and windscreen chips in the driver's view
Brake lining or pad worn below 1.5mma brake lining or pad worn below 1.5mm1.712.150.79×Feel for brake judder and pulling on the test drive
Windscreen or window damaged or seriously…Windscreen or window damaged or seriously discoloured but not adversely affecting driver's view1.882.360.80×Check wipers, washers and windscreen chips in the driver's view
Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the…Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the requirements3.063.590.85×Check tyre tread depth across the full width
Suspension joint dust cover severely deterioratedA suspension joint dust cover severely deteriorated1.061.900.56×Listen for knocks over bumps — worn joints show up on the test
Spring or spring component fractured or seriously…A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened1.212.860.42×Ask the seller about: A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened

Named defects ranked by how much more often they appear than the national average — not by raw rate.

Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT advisories: what gets flagged

Tyres are highest at 40.6 per 100 tests; Identification is lowest at 0.6 per 100 tests — the gap is 40.0 per 100 tests.

higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests

Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT advisories: what gets flagged — 2024 UK MOT data
Advisory rates table
GroupAdvisories per 100
Tyres40.6
Brakes23.6
Non-component advisories5.9
Suspension1.7
Road Wheels1.6
Identification0.6

Advisories are wear the tester noted but didn't fail — what will need money soon.

Tyres, brakes and suspension: Mercedes-Benz CLA against cars of the same age

AgePartMercedes-Benz CLASame age, petrol and dieselDifference
3 yearsTyres7.054.172.88
3 yearsBrakes1.931.770.16
3 yearsSuspension0.290.63-0.34
4 yearsTyres7.424.542.88
4 yearsBrakes2.322.43-0.11
4 yearsSuspension0.491.21-0.72
5 yearsTyres8.175.063.11
5 yearsBrakes2.613.09-0.48
5 yearsSuspension0.992.19-1.20
6 yearsTyres95.543.46
6 yearsBrakes3.043.81-0.77
6 yearsSuspension2.113.72-1.61
7 yearsTyres8.975.953.02
7 yearsBrakes3.244.55-1.31
7 yearsSuspension4.185.68-1.50
8 yearsTyres8.636.312.32
8 yearsBrakes3.445.38-1.94
8 yearsSuspension6.987.78-0.80

Failing items per 100 initial tests, 2019-2024. The comparison group is every petrol or diesel car tested at the same age, so weight and drivetrain show up rather than fleet age.

If a car like this fails, does it fail again?

A failure rate does not say whether a failure is a one-off or the start of something. This follows the same vehicles into their next ordinary MOT a year later — retests after a repair are excluded, because they follow a failure by definition. 2019-2024.

After this year's testFails next yearVehicles followed
It failed21.2%8,251
It passed17.3%153,939

A failed test raises next year's chance of failing again by 3.9 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is identification of the vehicle — 23.6% of those vehicles fail again next year. Some of this is the vehicle and some is the owner: a car that was let go once tends to be let go again. One caveat: a car that fails may be sold or scrapped rather than tested again, so these figures describe the vehicles that came back.

Adjusted for how much these are actually driven

The headline index adjusts for the fleet's age. Wear, though, follows mileage: a three-year-old taxi and a three-year-old garage queen sit in the same age band. These two rows compare every car with vehicles of the same age, and then with vehicles of the same age and the same annual mileage, 2019-2024, on 257,881 tests. Both stand on the six-year corpus so they are measured on identical data — compare them with each other, not with the headline index above, which is measured on 2024 alone.

Standardised forIndexReading
Age only95.3fails less often than expected
Age and annual mileage89.8fails less often than vehicles driven as much
Share doing under 3,000 miles a year2.3%a normal spread of use

Mileage matters here: matching on how much these are driven moves the figure by 5.5 points — this fleet works harder than the vehicles it is measured against, so the age-only view penalises it — but it does not change which side of normal the car sits on. One limit to keep in mind: mileage is partly a result of how often a car breaks down — one that spends weeks in the workshop covers fewer miles — so the mileage-matched figure can understate a real weakness. Tests with no usable odometer reading are left out of it.

How the Mercedes-Benz CLA compares with cars of its own age and size

Not against the whole fleet — against cars of the same size class tested at the same age, 2019-2024.

AgeMercedes-Benz CLASame class, same ageDifferenceTests
3 years14.12%11.66%+2.46 pp53,966
4 years14.77%13.27%+1.5 pp48,144
5 years16.67%15.04%+1.63 pp44,416
6 years18.94%17.32%+1.62 pp38,242
7 years20.76%20.14%+0.62 pp29,769
8 years22.11%23.22%-1.11 pp21,345
9 years24.28%26.75%-2.47 pp13,573
10 years27.52%30.04%-2.52 pp6,493
11 years28.57%33.46%-4.88 pp2,121

Raw first-time failure rates within each age, so fleet age cannot flatter either side. A positive difference means this model fails more often than its own class at that age.

How does the Mercedes-Benz CLA perform as it gets older?

The CLA at age 11 is well below the reference at 28.6%, against 33.2% for all vehicles of the same age.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

How does the Mercedes-Benz CLA perform as it gets older? — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · failure-rate scale 0–39%.

Takeaway: a 10-year-old CLA has roughly a 27% chance of failing its MOT.

Data table
AgeMercedes-Benz CLAAll vehiclesGap
314.1%12.4%+1.7 pp
414.5%13.1%+1.4 pp
516.4%15.1%+1.3 pp
618.4%17.5%+0.9 pp
721.1%20.2%+0.9 pp
822.8%23.3%-0.5 pp
924.0%26.5%-2.6 pp
1026.8%30.1%-3.3 pp
1128.6%33.2%-4.6 pp

Is a Mercedes-Benz CLA ULEZ compliant?

The share of classifiable 2024 Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT tests likely ULEZ compliant by first-registration date is 90.5%.

Based on 63,877 classifiable initial MOT tests. This describes the tested fleet, not a specific car. MOT data do not record Euro class, so likely compliance is inferred from fuel and first-registration date. For the only authoritative answer, check the registration with TfL's official ULEZ checker.

higher = larger share likely compliantinferred from fuel and first-registration date; not a recorded Euro class

Age-band estimate from classifiable initial MOT tests
Vehicle age at testLikely ULEZ-compliant shareTests
Under 3 yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 489
3–5 years100.0%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 25,696
6–7 years100.0%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 16,615
8 years100.0%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 7,695
9 years66.4%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 6,921
10–14 years41.9%
Check a registration with TfL
n = 6,461
15–17 yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 0
18 yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 0
19 yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 0
20+ yearsSuppressed — sample below publication threshold
Check a registration with TfL
n = 0

Mercedes-Benz CLA petrol vs diesel: which ages best

Diesel is highest at 21.8%; Hybrid is lowest at 14.8% — the gap is 6.9 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Mercedes-Benz CLA petrol vs diesel: which ages best — 2024 UK MOT data
Fuel split table
FuelTests% failingGap vs best
Petrol34,48517.7%+2.9 pp
Diesel26,95621.8%+6.9 pp
Hybrid2,44714.8%+0.0 pp

Chart sample sizes: n=34k · n=27k · n=2,447.

How dangerous are Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT failures?

Major defects are well below the reference at 15.2 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

How dangerous are Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT failures? — 2024 UK MOT data
Severity table
SeverityThis family /100National /100Family / national
Minor5.2014.220.37×
Major15.2452.750.29×
Dangerous10.8011.150.97×

Chart values: Minor 5.2 · Major 15.2 · Dangerous 10.8.

Per 100 tests on this family. National average: Minor 14.2 · Major 52.8 · Dangerous 11.2 per 100.

Does the month of a Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT matter?

Nov is highest at 18.8%; Mar is lowest at 16.6% — the gap is 2.2 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Does the month of a Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT matter? — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart scale: 15%–33%.

bars: Mercedes-Benz CLA · dashed: all class-4 cars

Month-by-month table
MonthMercedes-Benz CLAAll vehiclesGap
Jan18%31.12%-13.1 pp
Feb17.59%29.99%-12.4 pp
Mar16.6%28.26%-11.7 pp
Apr18.35%29.78%-11.4 pp
May17.63%28.79%-11.2 pp
Jun17.55%28.15%-10.6 pp
Jul17.44%29.33%-11.9 pp
Aug17.39%29.2%-11.8 pp
Sep17.33%28.19%-10.9 pp
Oct18.4%30.34%-11.9 pp
Nov18.84%30.58%-11.7 pp
Dec18.12%29.33%-11.2 pp

Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 2.2 percentage points — booking month barely matters for this family. Seasonality partly reflects registration-date clustering, not weather.

Before reading the shape: most of it is not about cars. Britain changes its registration plates twice a year, and 18.9% of these cars were first registered in March with another17.1% in September — 36% in two months against the 17% an even spread would give. An MOT falls due three years after first registration, so the buying calendar becomes the testing calendar. That shapes how many cars are tested each month — not how often they fail: the busiest months here are not the worst ones, so read the failure line on its own and the volume behind it separately.

Mercedes-Benz CLA average mileage by age

At age 8, the middle half of CLAs runs from 56,030 miles to 88,384 miles, against 71,043 miles as the median.

further right = more milesmedian is the typical car; band is p25–p75

Bars: Mercedes-Benz CLA · dashed: all class-4 cars — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · odometer scale 0–116k mi.

Does high mileage mean more Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT failures at the same age?

Within the same age group, split by odometer (2024 MOTs), so this separates wear from age: at ages 6–9, 14.6% of those with under 40,000 miles failed first time versus 27.4% of those with over 140,000 miles.Inside this age group, higher mileage goes with more failures.

Does high mileage mean more Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT failures at the same age? — 2024 UK MOT data
Mercedes-Benz CLA: first-time failure by mileage within each age group (2024)
AgeOdometer% failing95% intervalTests
3–5<40k miles13.1%12.6–13.6%16,711
3–540-70k miles18.2%17.4–19.1%7,816
3–570-100k miles20%17.7–22.6%1,025
3–5100-140k miles20.5%14.4–28.3%127 (rough estimate)
6–9<40k miles14.6%13.6–15.6%4,629
6–940-70k miles20.2%19.5–20.9%13,936
6–970-100k miles24.4%23.5–25.3%8,969
6–9100-140k miles27.5%25.9–29.1%3,107
6–9140k+ miles27.4%24–31.2%572
10–14<40k miles11%7.8–15.4%263 (rough estimate)
10–1440-70k miles22.9%20.8–25.2%1,431
10–1470-100k miles28.5%26.8–30.3%2,637
10–14100-140k miles31.1%29–33.4%1,700
10–14140k+ miles29.8%25.7–34.3%426 (rough estimate)

line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75)

Mileage by age (p25 / median / p75)
Agep25Medianp75Tests
320,21428,68239,0409,859
424,31333,93145,5937,547
529,59039,42351,3038,290
637,51149,09462,6558,362
747,29660,78977,2428,253
856,03071,04388,3847,695
961,98578,35898,2296,921
1067,42585,044106,6444,340
1172,14790,826110,3072,121

A typical 8-year-old CLA has ~71,043 miles on the clock. Much more — ask why; much less — check for gaps in the MOT history.

Where in Britain the Mercedes-Benz CLA fails its MOT most

Salisbury area is highest at 25.7%; Blackburn area is lowest at 12.7% — the gap is 13.0 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Mercedes-Benz CLA line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75) — 2024 UK MOT data
Toughest areas% failingvs model overall
Salisbury (SP)25.74%+8.0 pp
Huddersfield (HD)24%+6.3 pp
Cambridge (CB)23.58%+5.8 pp
Canterbury (CT)22.66%+4.9 pp
Dundee (DD)22.02%+4.3 pp
Easiest areas% failingvs model overall
Blackburn (BB)12.74%-5.0 pp
Nottingham (NG)13.06%-4.7 pp
Truro (TR)13.33%-4.4 pp
Harrow (HA)13.49%-4.3 pp
Kingston upon Thames (KT)13.92%-3.8 pp

Why do areas differ?

For each external factor we correlate the area fail rate with the factor across postcode areas that have ≥800 tests of this family, then compare the bottom vs top fifth (quintile) of the factor. Correlation, not causation — factors travel together (the north is colder and often poorer; urban areas are denser and less salted). Road surface condition is joined now, for the 91 English areas the DfT publishes, and it explains nothing: the correlation with suspension failures is −0.01 and with body and structure failures 0.07. Potholes wreck wheels and tyres between tests, but by the time a car reaches the bay the road it drives on leaves no measurable trace.

In the most coastal fifth of areas this model fails 2.0 pp more often than in the most inland fifth (r=-0.33, n=98 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest urban share this model fails 2.0 pp less often than in the lowest fifth (r=-0.25, n=98 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest mot centre density this model fails 2.1 pp more often than in the lowest fifth (r=0.24, n=98 areas with ≥800 tests).

Mercedes-Benz CLA Why do areas differ? — 2024 UK MOT data
Values shown in the quintile chart
FactorLow QHigh QGapCorrelation
Distance to coast19.5%17.5%-2.0 ppr=-0.33
Urban share18.2%16.3%-1.9 ppr=-0.25
MOT centre density16.7%18.8%+2.1 ppr=0.24

Factors that only mean something combined

Some conditions are useless on their own and informative multiplied together. Frost days alone say little — Britain barely freezes. Salt tonnage alone says little — it tracks frost. Distance to the sea alone says little. Multiply the first two and divide by the third and you get an index of how hard an area attacks a car's underside, and it lines up with the corrosion defects we actually record. We built five such combinations and tested each against our own data. Three survived; two did not, and the failures are listed here on purpose — a proxy that was never checked is decoration. One survivor only survived on the second attempt: built from a crude stand-in for street parking it failed outright, and rebuilt from the census — terraced streets carrying more cars than they have driveways — it works, and carries information the salt index does not.

Composite area indicators, each tested against a defect rate we measure
CompositeBuilt fromTested againstrVerdict
Underbody corrosionfrost days × salt load ÷ (distance to coast + 1)share of tests with a corrosion defect+0.42holds (116 areas)
Tyre wearrain days × annual miles ÷ age at first tyre advisoryshare of tests failing on tyres+0.45holds (116 areas)
Overnight corrosionterraced housing × cars per household × frost daysshare with a corrosion defect+0.41holds (102 areas) — and adds signal beyond the first index
Deferred maintenancedeprivation × advisory-to-failure conversion ÷ labour ratecars repeating the same advisory−0.26fails (118 areas)
Powertrain stressengine capacity ÷ kerb weightsuspension, brake and emissions failures−0.16fails (22 models)

The deprivation result is the one worth dwelling on. The intuition that poorer areas defer repairs is strong enough that most people treat it as established. We tested it twice — once on raw failure rates (r = 0.04) and again, more fairly, on whether an advisory turns into a failure — and it did not hold any of the three times we tried it — on raw failure rates, on advisory-to-failure conversion, and again with deprivation measured properly inside each nation rather than England alone. We are closing it. What does predict local failure rates is the density of test centres, which is a statement about testing, not about cars.

All external-factor correlations (machine-readable)
Factorrn areasLow-Q fail %High-Q fail %Gap ppLow-Q factorHigh-Q factor
Distance to coast (km)-0.3259819.517.5-2.06.281.2
Urban share (0–1)-0.2479818.216.3-2.00.51
MOT centre density (per 10k vehicles)0.2419816.718.8+2.158.2
Income deprivation (score)-0.1858518.317.0-1.40.10.2
Road-salt proxy (g/m²-yr)0.0819818.018.6+0.6222.6625.7
Frost days (days/year)0.0779818.518.5+0.011.535.5
Terrain gradient (% grade)0.0706018.519.4+0.90.53.5

Deprivation uses England IMD 2019 income score only (Scotland SIMD is a different scale). Salt proxy is a simplified NWSRG-style dry-salt sum from air Tmin; coastalness is distance from the area centroid to the nearest coastline.

Every dot is a postcode area — size = how many were tested there, colour = share failing. These figures are not age-adjusted: coastal and rural areas often run older fleets and salted roads, so higher raw fail rates do not automatically mean a worse local stock of this model.

Map labels: Scotland · N. England · Wales · London · S. West. Colour scale: 14%–22% failing.

Mercedes-Benz CLA survival: which cars are still on the road

By age 11 is well below the reference at 4.9%, against 100.0% at the ages 4–6 reference level.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Mercedes-Benz CLA survival: which cars are still on the road — 2024 UK MOT data

Chart axes: car age, years · survival vs ages 4–6 · scale 0–105%.

Survival vs fail rate by age
AgeTestsSurvival vs ages 4–6Fail %
353,966100%14.12%
448,144100%14.77%
544,416100%16.67%
638,24287.7%18.94%
729,76968.3%20.76%
821,34549%22.11%
913,57331.1%24.28%
106,49314.9%27.52%
112,1214.9%28.57%

By age 11, only about 5% as many cars of this family present for MOT as at ages 4–6 (reference n≈43,600); survivors still fail at 28.6% vs 14.8% at age 4. Older cars that still appear are a selected subset — weaker ones have already left.

How many miles does a Mercedes-Benz CLA last?

100,000+ miles is highest at 6.0%; 150,000+ miles is lowest at 0.5% — the gap is 5.4 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

OdometerTests ≥ thresholdShare of sample
100,000+ miles15,3425.95%
150,000+ miles1,3950.54%

Of 257,900 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 6.0% had reached 100k miles, 0.5% had reached 150k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.

How many years is a Mercedes-Benz CLA likely to last?

Bought at age 5 is highest at 3.1 years; Bought at age 10 is lowest at 0.8 years — the gap is 2.3 years.

bigger number = longer remaining lifeyears on the observed survival curve

Age nowTypical mileage (p50)Expected years left
5—3.1
8—at least 1.5
10—at least 0.8

estimateEstimate only — not a warranty: a typical 10-year-old example of this family has at least 0.8 expected years of further MOT-present life. The curve is observed only until age 11, so the true figure is likely higher.

Mercedes-Benz CLA faults that come together

Emissions & leaks + Seatbelts & SRS stand out at 11.31×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.

above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less

Group AGroup BTogetherLift
Noise, emissions and leaksSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems31311.31× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSteering3810.35× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems3508.14× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureNoise, emissions and leaks1267.59× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentNoise, emissions and leaks4377.17× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment1716.63× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSteering376.49× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems716.06× (rough estimate)
BrakesNoise, emissions and leaks5216.02×
Identification of the vehicleSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems545.36× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleNoise, emissions and leaks765.32× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksSuspension4475.3× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentRoad Wheels1935.23× (rough estimate)
BrakesSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems3115.1× (rough estimate)
SteeringSuspension405.07× (rough estimate)
BrakesSteering404.94× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureSuspension1754.9× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureRoad Wheels474.68× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksRoad Wheels1104.63× (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsSuspension2624.4× (rough estimate)
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentSuspension5654.31×
Identification of the vehicleLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment954.28× (rough estimate)
BrakesLamps, reflectors and electrical equipment5464.06×
Body, chassis, structureIdentification of the vehicle243.97× (rough estimate)
Road WheelsSeat belts and supplementary restraint systems663.94× (rough estimate)
Noise, emissions and leaksVisibility5913.91×
Noise, emissions and leaksTyres9953.83×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentVisibility8963.82×
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsVisibility4073.82× (rough estimate)
Road WheelsSuspension1903.72× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureBrakes1353.69× (rough estimate)
BrakesIdentification of the vehicle1163.68× (rough estimate)
BrakesTyres2,0813.64×
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsTyres6623.62×
Road WheelsVisibility3213.51× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleRoad Wheels303.47× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureVisibility2123.32× (rough estimate)
SteeringVisibility473.32× (rough estimate)
Road WheelsTyres5193.3×
Identification of the vehicleTyres3013.18× (rough estimate)
BrakesSuspension5883.16×
BrakesVisibility1,0503.15×
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipmentTyres1,2203.03×
Identification of the vehicleSuspension922.99× (rough estimate)
BrakesRoad Wheels1472.81× (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleVisibility1492.71× (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureTyres2822.57× (rough estimate)
TyresVisibility2,5602.56×
SuspensionVisibility8002.46×
SuspensionTyres1,3482.42×
SteeringTyres582.39× (rough estimate)
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systemsSteering19too few (rough estimate)
Body, chassis, structureSteering13too few (rough estimate)
Road WheelsSteering12too few (rough estimate)
Identification of the vehicleSteering6too few (rough estimate)

Defects in «Brakes» and «Noise, emissions and leaks» appear together 6.02× more often than chance (521 co-occurrences in the same test; lift≥1.3, n≥500).

Lift = how many times more often both groups appear on the same test than if independent. A pair is listed from 5 tests with both faults; the lift is shown from 20, and called above chance only when its 95% interval excludes 1 (see rough estimates).

Is low mileage better for a Mercedes-Benz CLA?

Cars driven under 5,000 miles a year is well below the reference at 11.9%, against 21.0% for cars driven 8,000–12,000 miles a year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

BandFail %Tests
<5k miles/year11.9%14,766
8–12k miles/year21.01%61,034
Gap (low − normal)-9.1 pp—
By fuel and age

Diesel

AgeLow-use fail %nNormal fail %nGap pp
59.391,54517.548,821-8.15 pp
612.331,47620.179,364-7.84 pp
711.981,12721.738,265-9.75 pp
812.9982423.536,239-10.54 pp
915.850025.813,781-10.01 pp
1013.8126829.991,767-16.19 pp
1112.358130.24506-17.89 pp

Petrol

AgeLow-use fail %nNormal fail %nGap pp
510.353,49918.097,412-7.75 pp
611.952,20921.015,545-9.06 pp
711.191,41222.63,955-11.41 pp
813.693423.132,875-9.53 pp
915.3564526.492,001-11.14 pp
1018.9632731.051,008-12.09 pp
1127.2711032.84402-5.56 pp

At matched ages 5–14, cars averaging under 5k miles/year fail at 11.9% vs 21.0% for 8–12k miles/year — 9.1 pp lower (n_low=14,766, n_normal=61,034). In this family low annual use is associated with fewer MOT fails, not more — the ‘garage queen’ penalty is not visible in overall fail rates. Diesel alone: 11.8% low-use vs 20.8% normal (-8.9 pp).

Which Mercedes-Benz CLA engine is best?

petrol 1.2–1.5 is highest at 105.1; petrol 1.8–2.0 is lowest at 85.3 — the gap is 19.8 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Engine bands against this model's own failure rate at the same ages
FuelCapacityvs own age normRaw fail %Tests
petrol1.8–2.0 litre85.315.16%25,216
diesel1.8–2.0 litre93.113.46%6,317
petrol1.5–1.8 litre100.718.21%68,594
dieselover 2.0 litre101.718.75%126,784
diesel1.5–1.8 litre104.822.66%2,864 (rough estimate)
petrol1.2–1.5 litre105.115.34%27,038

Splitting this model by fuel alone hides the thing that actually differs. Within the same badge, the petrol 1.2–1.5 runs at 105.1 against this model's own age norm while the petrol 1.8–2.0 runs at 85.3 — a spread of 19.8 points between two cars that share a name.

Read this one with more care than the rest of the page. Age is held constant, but who buys which engine is not: the largest capacity in a range is often a performance or executive variant that is garaged, cherished and lightly driven, while the smallest is frequently a fleet or entry car worked hard from new. The gap below is real in the test records; how much of it is the engine and how much is the owner, this data cannot separate. Bands under 100 tests are not shown; bands under 5,000 tests are rough estimates.

Best year for a Mercedes-Benz CLA, and the years to avoid

Build year 2013 is highest at 105.6; Build year 2017 is lowest at 99.2 — the gap is 6.4 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

build year vs the same model at the same age · 100 = as expected

Mercedes-Benz CLA build year vs the same model at the same age · 100 = as expected — 2024 UK MOT data
Mercedes-Benz CLA by build year, tests 2019–2024. Below 100 is better than the model's own age norm.
Every build year with its confidence interval
Build yearvs own age norm95% CIRaw fail %TestsVerdict
2020103.298.9–107.514.44%15,129no different
2019104.7101.4–10815.38%25,371worse
2018103.7101–106.416.27%34,292worse
201799.296.9–101.516.43%44,185no different
2016100.998.8–103.117.93%47,234no different
2015100.197.9–102.319.47%42,068no different
201499.296.6–101.821.38%26,731no different
2013105.6102–109.324.84%13,200worse

The best build year here is 2018 and the weakest is 2013. Comparing build years sounds simple and is not: within a single year of testing, a car's build year and its age are the same number, so a naive comparison of years is a comparison of ages wearing a disguise. Each year below is measured against the same model at the same age in other cohorts, across six years of testing — 3 of 8 years come out distinguishable from their own model's age norm.

Two limits worth knowing before you act on this. Age, test year and build year are locked together by arithmetic, so the test-year effect is taken from the observed national failure level of each year rather than estimated — it is an adjustment, not a solution.

Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT repair costs

The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £28.50 to £54.15, against £54.85 for the test itself.

bigger number = costs morepounds per test, MOT-failing faults only

MOT repairs, budget
£29–54
per test, repairs only
The test itself
£54.85
statutory cap, unchanged since 2010
How the figure is built: chance of failing × typical price of that repair
ComponentFails per 100 testsTypical repairIts priceContribution
Tyres11.4 (nat. 8.7)Tyre (single mid-range 16" fitted)£90£10.26
Suspension3.5 (nat. 15.36)Suspension coil spring (single corner)£180£6.30
Brakes3.8 (nat. 11.25)Front brake pads (parts + labour, typical hatchback)£150£5.70
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment2.6 (nat. 18.09)Battery replacement (standard 12V lead-acid)£140£3.64
Noise, emissions and leaks1.3 (nat. 3.67)Exhaust rear silencer£200£2.60

Multiply how often each component fails on this model by what that repair usually costs, and you get the amount an owner should expect to budget per test for MOT-failing faults only — roughly £29 to £54, on top of the test fee itself. It is a budgeting figure, not a quote: the spread between a set of pads and a set of discs is most of the range.

Prices are modal quotes from a hand-kept catalogue of published UK garage guides — we do not scrape the booking sites, their terms forbid it, so this list is short and updated by hand with a source and date against each line. Each line prices one typical repair in that group, not a full remedy, and only groups our catalogue actually covers are counted. The contrast worth noticing is the second card: the legal maximum for the test has been £54.85 since 2010, while the repairs it uncovers have followed inflation the whole time.

For scale from a different direction: Warrantywise, which sees used-car warranty claims rather than test failures, puts the average claim at £2,052 across the ten highest-claim models it ranks and £539 for Honda, the lowest-claim make in its index (Warrantywise index 2026, 1.6 million claims, cars aged 3–15). Those sit an order of magnitude above the figures in this table, and the gap is the point: a warranty claim is a gearbox or an engine, which almost never fails an MOT, while the faults that do fail one are corrosion, lamps and tyres, which no warranty pays for. The two numbers answer different questions and neither replaces the other.

Mercedes-Benz CLA running costs for a fleet

Vehicles failing at age 10 stand out at 27.0%, against 16.0% at age 5, tested in the same year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Fails per 100 at age 5
16
vehicles needing work
At age 10
27
other cars of this model tested at age 10 in 2024
Repairs per 100
£2,850
plus £5,485 in test fees
Off the road
0d
median; 50.56% cleared same day
Failure rate and typical odometer by age
AgeFailsMedian odometerTestsGap vs age 5
314.09%28,6829,859-2.4 pp
414.47%33,9317,547-2.0 pp
516.45%39,4238,290+0.0 pp
618.36%49,0948,362+1.9 pp
721.07%60,7898,253+4.6 pp
822.83%71,0437,695+6.4 pp
923.96%78,3586,921+7.5 pp
1026.77%85,0444,340+10.3 pp
1128.57%90,8262,121+12.1 pp

No single year stands out as the point where this model starts costing more: the year-to-year steps in its failure rate are too small or rest on too few tests to name one (D1 rule: a step is named only with at least 2,000 tests on both sides and a jump above 3 percentage points).

Repair spend uses the same modal prices as the section above, so it inherits the same limits: one typical repair per component group, not a full remedy. Downtime is the gap between the failed test and the passed re-test, which is the window a vehicle is legally off the road.

Mercedes-Benz CLA rust problems: where they corrode

Age-standardised corrosion susceptibility is well below the reference at 0.11×, against 1.00× for the national age-standardised rate.

above 1.0× = rusts more than averagebelow 1.0× = rusts less

How it rusts
0.11×
0.08% of tests record a corrosion defect vs 0.77% typical — age-standardised
Salt Belt exposure
64th
percentile among the models published here, from its tests across 98 postcode areas

This Mercedes-Benz CLA virtually never fails on corrosion once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are about typical for the models we publish. Both point the same way and reinforce each other: it resists corrosion even though its owners live in saltier areas than most.

Corrosion is the one failure mode that is as much about geography as about the car. We keep the two apart on purpose: a model can look rusty simply because it is popular in Scotland, and a model can look clean simply because it is bought in Surrey. Blending them into a single score would hide which of the two is doing the work.

Exposure is this model's tests weighted by an area corrosion index built from frost days, salt load and distance to the coast — the composite validated at r = 0.42 against corrosion defects we actually record. It is published as a rank, not a raw score, because every mainstream model skews towards low-corrosion areas for the simple reason that most of Britain's cars are in the south. Susceptibility is standardised to the national age profile, so an old fleet does not get labelled a rusty model.

Does a Mercedes-Benz CLA advisory become a failure?

Suspension is highest at 12.4%; Non-component advisories are lowest at 0.0% — the gap is 12.4 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

chance the same component fails at the next MOT, given an advisory now

Mercedes-Benz CLA chance the same component fails at the next MOT, given an advisory now — 2024 UK MOT data
Mercedes-Benz CLA, advisory → failure conversion by component group, chained tests 2019–2024. Chart labels and rates: Suspension 12.4% · Tyres 10.4% · Lamps & electrical 9.1% · Brakes 5.6% · Noise, emissions, leaks 3.7% · Road wheels 2.3% · Identification of the veh… 1.7% · Non-component 0%.
Advisory today → failure at the next test, with how long you have
ComponentFails next timeTypical lead timeMiles of warningAdvisories tracked
Suspension12.4%12 months7,9671,874
Tyres10.3%12 months8,54146,179
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment9.1%12 months9,604691
Brakes5.6%12 months8,25426,743
Noise, emissions and leaks3.7%12 months8,459655
Road wheels2.3%12 months8,6532,613
Identification of the vehicle1.7%11.9 months7,3631,021
Non-component advisories0.0%——10,386

This is the question an advisory note actually raises, and it needs six years of test history to answer. We followed the same vehicles from one MOT to the next across 2019–2024 and measured how often a component that was merely advised came back as a genuine failure at the next test.

Read it as a budgeting horizon, not a prophecy: the most likely component above turns into a failure for about 12 in 100 cars, and the median gap is 12 months and roughly 7,967 miles. The rest were repaired, sold, scrapped, or simply held. Rows with fewer than 500 tracked advisories are not shown.

What will fail next on a Mercedes-Benz CLA?

Suspension after a advisory at age 9-11 is highest at 15.3%; Brakes after a passed at age <3 are lowest at 1.9% — the gap is 13.4 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

Probability of each component failing at the next test, by age and last result
AgeLast testMost likely next failuresCars tracked
<3passedTyres 6.4% · Visibility 3.7% · Brakes 1.9%19,836
<3advisoryTyres 7.9% · Visibility 5.3% · Brakes 2.4%7,021
<3failureTyres 7.4% · Visibility 5.6% · Brakes 2.5%4,349
3-5passedTyres 7.4% · Visibility 3.8% · Brakes 2.2%62,447
3-5advisoryTyres 9.7% · Visibility 5.3% · Brakes 3.5%27,267
3-5failureTyres 10.1% · Visibility 6.2% · Brakes 3.9%17,049
6-8passedTyres 7.5% · Suspension 6.3% · Visibility 4.3%27,015
6-8advisoryTyres 10.0% · Suspension 8.1% · Visibility 6.0%14,666
6-8failureTyres 10.8% · Suspension 9.3% · Visibility 7.3%11,215
9-11passedSuspension 12.0% · Tyres 6.9% · Visibility 5.0%2,201
9-11advisorySuspension 15.3% · Tyres 10.2% · Visibility 7.4%1,410
9-11failureSuspension 14.8% · Tyres 9.2% · Visibility 8.6%1,458

The same chains, cut differently: given a car's age and how its last test went, which component most often causes trouble at the following one.

The pattern that repeats across every family: a failure at one test roughly doubles the chance of a failure on the same component at the next one, and an advisory sits about half-way between a clean pass and a failure. Age bands in years; probabilities are per car, not per defect item.

Mercedes-Benz CLA ownership: what six years of MOTs show

The same-day re-test pass rate is highest at 50.6%; The later re-test pass rate is lowest at 2.0% — the gap is 48.5 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Fixed same day
50.56%
of failures re-tested
Fails /10k miles
0.227
miles actually driven
Clean streaks
45.85%
3+ tests, nothing noted
Odometer anomaly
1.086%
reading went backwards

Failing is usually a same-week event, not a disaster. Of 35,232 failures followed through to their re-test, 50.56% were repaired and passed the same day and 47.4% within ten days; the median gap is 0 days. 61,699 defect items were cleared in the process.

Per mile driven, not per year. Dividing failures by the miles that actually went onto the odometers between consecutive tests gives 0.227 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 7,354 miles a year across 55,098 chains. This is the number to compare between models — an annual rate quietly rewards cars that barely leave the drive.

Two populations hide inside one model. 45.85% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 15.78% carried the same advisory three times or more — the same fault, noted, ignored, noted again. When you buy used you are buying one of those two histories, and the MOT record shows which.

Odometer anomalies: 1.086% of 55,135 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 14,708 miles. We call this an anomaly and not fraud on purpose — instrument swaps, imports, unit mix-ups and keying errors all land in the same bucket. Obvious typos (drops under 100 miles or over 90% of the reading) are already excluded.

Mercedes-Benz CLA safety recalls and how to check yours

DVSA recall campaigns stand out at 79.

bigger number = more recorded casescompare like-for-like scope, not sample size alone

recall campaigns launched per year

Mercedes-Benz CLA recall campaigns launched per year — 2024 UK MOT data
Campaigns launched per year for the Mercedes-Benz CLA. Source: DVSA vehicle safety recalls. Chart values: 2014: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2021: 24 · 2022: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2026: 3.
Most recent safety recall campaigns for the Mercedes-Benz CLA
ReferenceLaunchedVehiclesConcern
R/2026/20305/06/20265Software version of communication module
R/2025/53306/01/202622Bolting of front seats and belt buckles
R/2025/55605/01/202682SRPC2523 - Variant of 48V Wiring Harness
R/2025/45910/12/2025349SRPC2516 - Mechanics of the seat belt buckle
R/2025/46010/12/2025109SRPC2518 - Routing of window-airbag wiring harness
All 79 campaigns
ReferenceLaunchedBuild datesVehiclesConcern
R/2026/20305/06/202627/05/2025 – 14/01/20265Software version of communication module
R/2025/53306/01/202623/05/2025 – 30/07/202522Bolting of front seats and belt buckles
R/2025/55605/01/202625/11/2025 – 17/12/202582SRPC2523 - Variant of 48V Wiring Harness
R/2025/45910/12/202515/01/2025 – 06/09/2025349SRPC2516 - Mechanics of the seat belt buckle
R/2025/46010/12/202514/05/2025 – 24/10/2025109SRPC2518 - Routing of window-airbag wiring harness
R/2025/46110/12/202512/05/2025 – 20/09/2025649SRPC2517 - Software of driving assistance system
R/2025/46210/12/202506/08/2025 – 11/08/202516Composition of window-airbag fabric
R/2025/40806/10/202526/05/2025 – 21/07/202519SRPC2514 - Driving Assistance System Software
R/2025/13116/04/202527/02/2024 – 14/03/2024254SRPC2503 - Variant of rear axle brake hose
R/2024/16606/05/202428/11/2018 – 31/01/202452,400SRPC2404 – Backup function of steering software
R/2024/02407/02/202417/04/2013 – 04/08/201545On affected vehicles the panel located between the windshield and the panoramic sunroof mi
R/2023/11620/04/202302/12/2022 – 02/12/20221On affected vehicles the tyres might not meet specification resulting in a leak and possib
R/2022/19502/08/202207/03/2022 – 16/03/202212BOWDEN CABLES WITH AN INSUFFICIENT LENGTH MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED IN THE FRONT DOORS
R/2022/06124/03/202217/07/2018 – 12/09/201926A PARTICLE IN THE FUEL RAIL MIGHT LEAD TO A LEAK BETWEEN THE FUEL RAIL AND THE INJECTOR
R/2022/06224/03/202207/12/2019 – 24/11/202117BOLTING ON BRAKE CALIPER HOUSING MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/44428/01/202225/06/2020 – 08/07/2020113POWER SUPPLY CONNECTION OF POWER STEERING MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONTAMINATED WITH ADHESIVE
R/2021/43714/01/202219/01/2020 – 03/02/20212,829LOCKING PAWL SPRING OF THE LEFT HAND SIDE DOOR LOCKS MIGHT NOT BE GREASED CORRECTLY
R/2021/10601/12/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202123THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13001/12/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202121THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/37629/11/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202150,390THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/37629/11/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202150,390THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/27420/08/202130/07/2013 – 29/10/201961VEHICLES WITH A PANORAMIC SUNROOFTHE POLYCARBONATE PANEL MAY NOT HAVE BEEN BONDED CORRECTL
R/2021/20221/07/202130/11/2016 – 28/02/201713,707A BORE IN THE UNIVERSAL JOINT ON THE STEERING SHAFT MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/24615/07/202101/04/2019 – 09/05/201919THE BOLTING OF A SIDE CRASH SENSOR MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/11013/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/2021108,971THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/12011/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202186,604THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/12011/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202186,604THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/11110/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202190,716THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/11110/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202190,716THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13305/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/2021106,665THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13205/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202110,410THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13105/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202181,267THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/12805/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/20217THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13405/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/2021162,581THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13305/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/2021106,665THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13205/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202110,410THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13405/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/2021162,581THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/13105/05/202104/01/2016 – 29/01/202181,267THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/08415/04/202103/09/2019 – 24/08/20207THE VARIANT OF SPARK PLUGS INSTALLED MAY NOT MEET SPECIFICATIONS
R/2021/08230/03/202103/05/2016 – 02/07/202024THE COMMUNICATION MODULE MAY BE DEACTIVATED
R/2021/03018/02/202130/07/2020 – 10/09/2020543THE RIGHT HANDLE FOR ATTACHING THE CHILD SEAT TO THE ISOFIX BRACKET MAY BE MISSING ON THE
R/2020/27727/10/202011/12/2019 – 09/01/202037AN ELECTRICAL CONTACT INSIDE THE ENGINE CONTROL UNIT MAY NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATION
R/2020/23713/10/202007/10/2019 – 12/11/201930VEHICLES MAY BE FILLED WITH THE REFRIGERANT R-134a INSTEAD OF R-1234yf
R/2020/26212/10/202021/10/2019 – 26/06/20201,074THE OIL SUPPLY LINE OF THE TURBOCHARGER MAY LEAK
R/2020/23606/10/202001/03/2017 – 30/09/20183,127THE EMERGENCY CALL SYSTEM (eCall) DOES NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATION
R/2020/13421/07/202006/05/2019 – 10/05/2019134THE MOUNTING OF THE GAS LINE TO THE GAS GENERATOR OF THE INERTER SYSTEM MAY NOT MEET SPECI
R/2019/44621/07/202029/04/2015 – 02/11/201775THE CALIBRATION OF THE OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR THE PASSENGER SEAT MAY NOT MEET
R/2019/35407/11/201901/11/2012 – 31/10/20131,407THE REFRIGERANT USED IN THE AIR CONDITION SYSTEM DOES NOT MEET LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
R/2019/34805/11/201901/11/2012 – 31/10/201358THE REFRIGERANT USED IN THE AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM MAY NOT MEET LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
R/2019/33705/11/201909/08/2018 – 17/09/20192,345THE FOUR LOCKNUTS SECURING THE AIR BAG MIGHT BE MISSING
R/2019/34701/11/201901/11/2012 – 31/10/2013432THE REFRIGERANT USED IN THE AIR CONDITION SYSTEM DOES NOT MEET LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
R/2019/26918/09/201901/02/2017 – 31/07/2019294THE SOFTWARE OF THE RADAR CONTROL UNIT MAY NOT MEET SPECIFICATION
R/2019/21730/07/201901/07/2018 – 28/02/20191,209THE SOFTWARE OF THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL UNIT MIGHT NOT MEET SPECIFICATION.
R/2019/10108/05/201901/02/2018 – 28/02/20181THE ELECTRICAL CONTACT OF THE TAIL LAMPS MIGHT BE IMPAIRED
R/2018/34927/02/201901/01/2018 – 28/02/2018163THE CALIBRATION OF THE FRONT PASSENGER SEAT OCCUPANT CLASIFICATION SYSTEM MAY NOT CORRESPO
R/2018/26819/11/201801/10/2017 – 30/04/20185,030DOORS ON LEFT VEHICLE SIDE (PASSENGER SIDE) REMAIN PERMANENTLY LOCKED AFTER THE VEHICLE HA
R/2018/13011/06/201801/11/2011 – 31/07/201778,608ELECTRICAL WIRING IN STEERING ASSEMBLY MAY BE INSUFFICIENTLY GROUNDED
R/2018/09811/05/201801/11/2011 – 31/07/201774,329STEERING COMPONENTS MAY BE INSUFFICIENTLY GROUNDED
R/2018/06909/04/201801/11/2011 – 31/07/201767,027ELECTRICAL WIRING IN STEERING ASSEMBLY MAY BE INSUFFICIENTLY GROUNDED
R/2017/28218/12/201701/11/2011 – 31/07/201746,093ELECTRICAL WIRING IN STEERING ASSEMBLY MAY BE INSUFFICIENTLY GROUNDED
R/2017/16120/06/201701/08/2016 – 31/03/201715LEFT WINDOW AIRBAG MAY NOT DEPLOY AS INTENDED
R/2017/16220/06/201701/08/2016 – 31/03/201717RIGHT WINDOW AIRBAG MAY FAIL TO DEPLOY AS INTENDED
R/2017/17920/06/201701/04/2011 – 30/04/20134,787VACUUM LINE BRAKE BOOSTER MAY BREAK
R/2017/09620/06/201701/02/2014 – 28/02/201774,444STARTING CURRENT LIMITER MAY OVERLOAD
R/2017/16020/06/20171LEFT AND RIGHT WINDOW AIRBAGS MAY FAIL TO DEPLOY AS INTENDED
R/2017/17720/06/201701/08/2016 – 31/03/20171,034AIRBAG MAY NOT DEPLOY CORRECTLY
R/2017/12419/04/201701/01/2004 – 31/03/201742FAULTY CONTROL UNIT MAY CAUSE VEHICLE TO PERFORM OUTSIDE SPECIFICATION
R/2016/27114/12/20161REAR SEAT BACKREST MAY COLLAPSE IN A COLLISION
R/2016/12428/09/201601/10/2015 – 30/11/201538VEHICLE MAY STALL
R/2016/08522/04/201602/09/2015 – 02/09/20154RISK OF FIRE
R/2016/08822/04/20161POSSIBLE LOSS OF POWER STEERING ASSISTANCE
R/2015/25921/01/201628/10/2015 – 19/11/20151,327RISK OF FIRE
R/2015/21019/11/201516/07/2015 – 11/09/2015395ENGINE MAY FAIL
R/2015/20819/11/201516/07/2015 – 11/09/201514ENGINE MAY FAIL
R/2015/14512/08/201508/09/2014 – 07/11/20141,028FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG MAY NOT DEPLOY
R/2015/09914/07/201501/09/2011 – 30/06/20133,890POSSIBILITY OF LOSS OF DRIVE
R/2014/18216/01/201501/02/2014 – 30/11/201461,672OIL MAY LEAK
R/2014/07607/07/201401/05/2014 – 31/05/20147SEAT BELT ANCHORATE AND WINDOW BAGS MAY NOT PERFORM CORRECTLY
R/2014/07507/07/201401/05/2014 – 31/05/20142SEATBELT ANCHORAGE POINT MAY NOT BE SECURE

DVSA lists 79 safety recall campaigns for the Mercedes-Benz CLA, covering roughly 1,787,789 vehicles in total. A recall is the manufacturer fixing a fault for free, so an open recall on your car costs nothing to clear.

Counter-intuitive, and measured on our own data: across the 25 families published here, more recalls go with a lower MOT Risk Index (r = −0.52). Heavily recalled models are not worse cars in the test bay — an active manufacturer removes the fault before it becomes an MOT failure.

Check whether a specific car has an outstanding recall — free, by registration — at DVSA's recall service. Source: DVSA vehicle safety recalls (check-vehicle-recalls.service.gov.uk), OGL.

Mercedes-Benz CLA technical service bulletins: what dealers are told

US market, Mercedes-Benz CLA-CLASS and its variants, model years 2015–2022 only. A count of bulletins, not a UK failure rate.

NHTSA manufacturer communications are 468.

bigger number = more recorded dealer communicationsnot affected vehicles or confirmed faults

These are the issues the manufacturer fixes quietly: service communications sent to dealers without a public recall campaign. They show what the service network has been told even when the issue never became news.

United States · NHTSA manufacturer communications

US technical service bulletins by communication year; leading subjects cover the full file
Communication yearBulletinsLeading subjects across all years
20138
  • Electrical system (202)
  • Equipment (74)
  • Engine (41)
  • Powertrain (41)
  • Steering (32)
  • Engine and cooling (28)
  • Exterior lighting (21)
  • Structure (20)
201425
201516
201616
201719
201810
201924
202054
202137
202229
202315
202456
202599
202660

Caveat worth stating plainly: this is NHTSA data about US-specification cars. British cars sold under the same name often use different gearboxes, engines and equipment, so a bulletin may describe a component that was never fitted here. The file counts dealer communications, not affected vehicles or confirmed failures, and it cannot tell you whether an individual UK car has the issue. A communication can carry more than one subject tag, so topic counts do not have to add up to the total. Source: NHTSA Manufacturer Communications API (US-market vehicles; queried model years 2015-2022). Licence: U.S. Government work / public domain · retrieved 2026-09-25.

Mercedes-Benz CLA owner complaints: what goes wrong

US market, Mercedes-Benz CLA-CLASS and its variants, model years 2015–2022 only. A count of owner complaints, not a UK failure rate; NHTSA has no UK denominator.

Engine (not MOT-tested) is highest at 86; Visibility is lowest at 27 — the gap is 59.

bigger number = more recorded casescompare like-for-like scope, not sample size alone

Owner complaints (US) against actual MOT failures (UK) for the same component groups
ComponentComplaintsShareMOT fail items per 100MOT rankAgreement
Engine (not MOT-tested)8622.3%not in top 6—complained about, rarely an MOT failure
Lamps & electrical6115.8%2.6#5complained about, fails occasionally
Restraints5714.8%not in top 6—complained about, rarely an MOT failure
Transmission (not MOT-tested)4712.2%not in top 6—complained about, rarely an MOT failure
Body & structure4110.6%not in top 6—complained about, rarely an MOT failure
Visibility277.0%5.5#2complained about and fails often

Two different populations answering two different questions: the MOT records what an inspector can measure once a year, the complaint file records what annoyed or frightened an owner on the road. A component high in one column and absent from the other is the interesting case — driver-assistance and electronics dominate complaints while almost never appearing as an MOT failure item.

What the reports actually say
I came out from work. Got in my car and started it and went to make a three-point turn to go the opposite direction on a quiet back street in the airbag deployed halfway through and blew up in my face, causing my hands to be hurt and difficulty with breathing.
NHTSA complaint, filed 02/10/2026 · AIR BAGS
Collision Prevention Assist Plus Inoperative Light on the dashboard it appears often and beep I am not sure and why
NHTSA complaint, filed 02/01/2026 · LANE DEPARTURE

US owners have filed 385 complaints about the equivalent Mercedes-Benz CLA to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, including 25 that mention a crash, 3 a fire and 29 an injury. These are owner reports, not verified findings — but they are the only large public record of what drivers themselves notice, and they cover the years between MOT tests.

Caveat worth stating plainly: US-specification cars, self-selected reporters, no denominator — complaint counts scale with how many cars were sold there and how motivated owners are to file. The mechanical gap matters as much as the statistical one: American cars of the same name often carry different gearboxes, engines and equipment — automatics where Britain buys manuals — so a drivetrain complaint filed in Ohio may describe a part that was never fitted here. Read the ranking inside a model, not between models, and treat drivetrain entries with particular caution. Source: NHTSA ODI consumer complaints (US market, public domain) — US-spec vehicles, indicative only.

Mercedes-Benz CLA inspection results in other countries

Netherlands APK is well below the reference at 33.2%, against 50.8% nationally.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Same model, different national inspection regimes
CountryTestThis model failsNational averagePositionSample
United KingdomMOT (class 4)19.33%26.01%-6.7 pp63,888
NetherlandsAPK33.2%50.8%-17.6 pp13,120
FinlandKatsastus11.8%26.3%-14.5 pp3,545
NorwayPKK24.7%33.7%-9 pp2,421

The verdict is consistent across every regime where the difference is clear, which is the strongest form this comparison takes: independent inspectorates, different rulebooks, same direction of travel.

The exact faults Netherlands records — APK defect codes, 2024
CodeFaultRecordedType
210Tyre pressure not at the correct value2,159failure
205Tyre with insufficient tread1,465failure
516Dipped headlight incorrectly aimed948failure
AC1Tyre down to 1.6–2.5 mm of tread895advisory
203Tyre damaged563failure
AC5Mechanical brake parts showing wear493advisory
391Wipers leave insufficient visibility313failure
RA1Airbag or seat-belt warning light showing a fault208advisory

Worth dwelling on how mundane the top of that list is: tyre pressure, tread depth, headlight aim. The Dutch APK records 0.67 defects per inspection against a much higher national failure rate than Britain's, and the reason is not that Dutch cars are worse — it is that the two regimes draw the line between "note it" and "fail it" in different places. Codes are the RDW's own; the English wording here is our translation of the Dutch original.

Britain is not the only country that inspects every car every year, and the Mercedes-Benz CLA is on the road in all of them. Each national regime writes its own rules, so the pass rates below are not comparable to each other — what does travel across a border is whether a model sits above or below its own country's average.

One caveat before you read the UK row: these are raw failure rates, because no other country publishes the age detail our index needs. This model's raw UK rate looks better than the national average while its age-adjusted index is 100.6 — the fleet here is unusually young, and the raw column silently credits that. The index above is the fair comparison; this table is for reading each country against itself.

Rows with fewer than 500 inspections are not published. Sources: RDW open data — Meldingen Keuringsinstantie + Geconstateerde Gebreken + Gekentekende voertuigen (2024), CC0. Not an RDW endorsement.; Traficom — Periodic inspections of cars by model / by model and fault object 2024, CC BY 4.0; Statens vegvesen — Periodisk kjøretøykontroll (PKK) 2024, CC BY 4.0. Adapted; licences and full notice.

Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT: quick answers

Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT Risk Index is close to the reference at 100.6, against 100 for a car with the same age profile.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

What is the Mercedes-Benz CLA first-time MOT pass rate?
80.67% of first attempts passed in 2024 (63,888 tests). This is the first-time figure: retests after repair are excluded. Basis: first-time, excluding retests.
Why does this number differ from other sites?
Other sites often report a pass rate that includes retests or counts all attempts. Our 19.33% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 63,888 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 100.6 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.

Compare the Mercedes-Benz CLA with other cars

Mercedes-Benz CLA is highest at 100.6; Ford Mondeo is lowest at 98.8 — the gap is 1.8 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Same brand

All Mercedes-Benz MOT statisticsMercedes-Benz A-Class MOT statsMercedes-Benz C-Class MOT stats

Similar risk

Mazda 2 (index 100.0)Skoda Fabia (index 99.8)Ford Mondeo (index 98.8)

Same size class

how Tesla Model 3 compareshow Fiat Ducato compareshow Volvo XC90 compares

By build year

Mercedes-Benz CLA 2013Mercedes-Benz CLA 2014Mercedes-Benz CLA 2015Mercedes-Benz CLA 2016Mercedes-Benz CLA 2017Mercedes-Benz CLA 2018Mercedes-Benz CLA 2019Mercedes-Benz CLA 2020

By area

Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT failure rate by postcode area

By failure group

Mercedes-Benz CLA body, chassis and structure failuresMercedes-Benz CLA brakes failuresMercedes-Benz CLA vehicle identification failuresMercedes-Benz CLA lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresMercedes-Benz CLA noise, emissions and leaks failuresMercedes-Benz CLA road wheels failuresMercedes-Benz CLA seat belts and airbags failuresMercedes-Benz CLA steering failuresMercedes-Benz CLA suspension failuresMercedes-Benz CLA tyres failuresMercedes-Benz CLA visibility failures

Inspections abroad

Mercedes-Benz CLA in NorwayMercedes-Benz CLA in FinlandMercedes-Benz CLA in the Netherlands


Data details & how to cite

Scope: class-4 vehicles (cars), initial tests only, outcomes pass / fail / fixed-on-the-spot at the station (PRS counts towards the failure rate — the defect was present at arrival). Index = observed initial failures ÷ failures expected for this fleet's exact age profile, ×100; margin of error is a 95% confidence interval. Covers ALL generations together — a 3-year-old and a 15-year-old are very different cars; a generation split is on the roadmap. Dataset release dataset_release_id=dvsa-2024-v2, frozen baseline; headline claim_id=family-stats:mercedes-cla:dvsa-2024-v2. Full method: methodology.

Cite: MOT Risk Index (2026). Mercedes-Benz CLA MOT statistics 2024 (data release dvsa-2024-v2; downloadable dataset motriskindex-families-2024-v5, doi:10.5281/zenodo.22975051). https://motriskindex.co.uk/cars/mercedes-cla/ · Published 2026-07-30.