Mercedes-Benz ML — MOT statistics 2024
The Mercedes-Benz ML failed 26.98% of 593 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 70.6 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car fails its MOT about 29% less often than expected for its age. Small sample — treat with care.
Age-adjusted peer: Land Rover Range Rover (index 70.9) — the two published results are 0.3 index points apart.
Mercedes-Benz ML common problems: what actually fails the MOT
Suspension is well below the reference at 9.5 per 100 tests, against 20.0 per 100 tests across UK vehicles of the same ages.
higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests
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.
| Group | This family | Cases behind it | UK, same ages | Family / national |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamps & electrical | 16.3 | 669 | 22.0 | 0.74×0.68–0.80 |
| Brakes | 11.4 | 468 | 13.9 | 0.82×0.74–0.89 |
| Suspension | 9.5 | 391 | 20.0 | 0.47×0.43–0.52 |
| Tyres | 9.0 | 372 | 10.0 | 0.90×0.81–1.00 |
| Body & structure | 8.1 | 333 | 6.6 | 1.23×1.10–1.37 |
| Visibility | 6.0 | 247 | 8.7 | 0.69×0.61–0.78 |
| What failed | per 100 tests (this family) | per 100 tests (UK average) | ratio family / UK | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot…A transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot severely deteriorated | 5.27 | 1.48 | 3.57× | Ask the seller about: A transmission shaft constant velocity joint boot severely d |
| Spring or spring component fractured or seriously…A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened | 6.63 | 2.86 | 2.32× | Ask the seller about: A spring or spring component fractured or seriously weakened |
| Direction indicator lamp missing, inoperative or…A direction indicator lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a multiple light source more than 1/2 not functioning | 1.75 | 0.60 | 2.92× | Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure |
| Engine MIL illuminated indicating a malfunctionEngine MIL illuminated indicating a malfunction | 2.24 | 1.19 | 1.89× | Ask the seller about: Engine MIL illuminated indicating a malfunction |
| Tyre seriously damagedA tyre seriously damaged | 3.26 | 2.54 | 1.28× | Check tyre tread depth across the full width |
| Brake pipe damaged or excessively corrodedBrake pipe damaged or excessively corroded | 2.04 | 1.41 | 1.45× | Look underneath for rust or cracks around subframe and suspension mountings |
| Windscreen or window damaged or seriously…Windscreen or window damaged or seriously discoloured but not adversely affecting driver's view | 2.99 | 2.36 | 1.27× | Check wipers, washers and windscreen chips in the driver's view |
| Tyre cords visible or damagedA tyre cords visible or damaged | 2.09 | 1.63 | 1.28× | Check tyre tread depth across the full width |
| Lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a…A lamp missing, inoperative or in the case of a multiple light source more than 1/2 not functioning | 1.97 | 2.09 | 0.94× | Try every light and switch — lamps are a top failure |
| Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the…Tyre tread depth not in accordance with the requirements | 3.04 | 3.59 | 0.85× | Check tyre tread depth across the full width |
Named defects ranked by how much more often they appear than the national average — not by raw rate.
Mercedes-Benz ML MOT advisories: what gets flagged
Tyres are highest at 41.1 per 100 tests; Lamps & electrical are lowest at 2.6 per 100 tests — the gap is 38.5 per 100 tests.
higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests
Advisory rates table
| Group | Advisories per 100 |
|---|---|
| Tyres | 41.1 |
| Brakes | 34.1 |
| Suspension | 15.6 |
| Emissions & leaks | 11.7 |
| Non-component advisories | 6.4 |
| Lamps & electrical | 2.6 |
Advisories are wear the tester noted but didn't fail — what will need money soon.
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 test | Fails next year | Vehicles followed |
|---|---|---|
| It failed | 35.9% | 251 |
| It passed | 23.9% | 2,243 |
A failed test raises next year's chance of failing again by 12.0 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment — 35.1% 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 4,101 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 for | Index | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Age only | 77.1 | fails less often than expected |
| Age and annual mileage | 71.8 | fails less often than vehicles driven as much |
| Share doing under 3,000 miles a year | 1.0% | a normal spread of use |
Mileage matters here: matching on how much these are driven moves the figure by 5.3 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 ML 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.
| Age | Mercedes-Benz ML | Same class, same age | Difference | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 years | 19.84% | 18.24% | +1.59 pp | 368 |
| 8 years | 23.59% | 20.54% | +3.05 pp | 390 |
| 9 years | 26.17% | 23.09% | +3.08 pp | 470 |
| 10 years | 22.96% | 25.6% | -2.64 pp | 514 |
| 11 years | 27.53% | 28.23% | -0.7 pp | 574 |
| 12 years | 27.42% | 30.56% | -3.14 pp | 609 |
| 13 years | 34.13% | 32.63% | +1.51 pp | 334 |
| 14 years | 30.95% | 34.58% | -3.63 pp | 294 |
| 15 years | 28.37% | 36.04% | -7.67 pp | 208 |
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 ML perform as it gets older?
The ML at age 12 is well below the reference at 23.9%, against 35.7% for all vehicles of the same age.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
Chart axes: car age, years · failure-rate scale 0–41%.
Takeaway: solid line: this family; dashed: all cars.
Data table
| Age | Mercedes-Benz ML | All vehicles | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 23.9% | 35.7% | -11.8 pp |
Is a Mercedes-Benz ML ULEZ compliant?
The share of classifiable 2024 Mercedes-Benz ML MOT tests likely ULEZ compliant by first-registration date is 1.0%.
Based on 591 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
| Vehicle age at test | Likely ULEZ-compliant share | Tests |
|---|---|---|
| Under 3 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 0 |
| 3–5 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 0 |
| 6–7 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 0 |
| 8 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 0 |
| 9 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 0 |
| 10–14 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 431 |
| 15–17 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 120 |
| 18 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 30 |
| 19 years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 6 |
| 20+ years | Suppressed — sample below publication threshold Check a registration with TfL | n = 4 |
How dangerous are Mercedes-Benz ML MOT failures?
Major defects are well below the reference at 41.8 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.
higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests
Severity table
| Severity | This family /100 | National /100 | Family / national |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minor | 16.01 | 14.22 | 1.13× |
| Major | 41.82 | 52.75 | 0.79× |
| Dangerous | 9.67 | 11.15 | 0.87× |
Chart values: Minor 16.0 · Major 41.8 · Dangerous 9.7.
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 ML MOT matter?
Oct is highest at 31.7%; Nov is lowest at 22.8% — the gap is 8.9 percentage points.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
Chart scale: 21%–33%.
bars: Mercedes-Benz ML · dashed: all class-4 cars
Month-by-month table
| Month | Mercedes-Benz ML | All vehicles | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan | 26.58% | 31.12% | -4.5 pp |
| Feb | 30.61% | 29.99% | +0.6 pp |
| Mar | 25.2% | 28.26% | -3.1 pp |
| Apr | 30.4% | 29.78% | +0.6 pp |
| May | 28.01% | 28.79% | -0.8 pp |
| Jun | 25.74% | 28.15% | -2.4 pp |
| Jul | 28.79% | 29.33% | -0.5 pp |
| Aug | 23.68% | 29.2% | -5.5 pp |
| Sep | 26.21% | 28.19% | -2.0 pp |
| Oct | 31.68% | 30.34% | +1.3 pp |
| Nov | 22.79% | 30.58% | -7.8 pp |
| Dec | 29.7% | 29.33% | +0.4 pp |
Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 8.9 percentage points — noticeable seasonality. 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 ML average mileage by age
At age 12, the middle half of MLs runs from 86,111 miles to 122,491 miles, against 102,615 miles as the median.
further right = more milesmedian is the typical car; band is p25–p75
Does high mileage mean more Mercedes-Benz ML MOT failures at the same age?
Within the same age group, split by odometer (2024 MOTs), so this separates wear from age: at ages 10–14, 22.7% of those with 70,000–100,000 miles failed first time versus 28.1% of those with over 140,000 miles.No clear mileage gap inside this age group, among cars still being tested.
| Age | Odometer | % failing | 95% interval | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10–14 | 70-100k miles | 22.7% | 16.8–30% | 154 (rough estimate) |
| 10–14 | 100-140k miles | 26.8% | 20.9–33.6% | 183 (rough estimate) |
| 10–14 | 140k+ miles | 28.1% | 18.6–40.1% | 64 (rough estimate) |
| 15+ | 100-140k miles | 31.1% | 20.9–43.6% | 61 (rough estimate) |
| 15+ | 140k+ miles | 36.4% | 25.8–48.4% | 66 (rough estimate) |
line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75)
Mileage by age (p25 / median / p75)
| Age | p25 | Median | p75 | Tests |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 86,111 | 102,615 | 122,491 | 305 |
A typical 12-year-old ML has ~102,615 miles on the clock. Much more — ask why; much less — check for gaps in the MOT history.
Where in Britain the Mercedes-Benz ML fails its MOT most
Too few tests in any single postcode area to name one, so this is the wider picture across 4,115 tests, 2019-2024.
| Part of Britain | % failing | Tests |
|---|---|---|
| Wales | 31.98% | 172 |
| Scotland | 28.04% | 271 |
| Southern England | 27.8% | 1,993 |
| Northern England | 27.14% | 549 |
| Midlands | 25.75% | 1,130 |
Raw pass/fail rates, not age-adjusted: fleets differ by region. England is split north of Sheffield, between Sheffield and Oxford, and south of it.
How many miles does a Mercedes-Benz ML last?
100,000+ miles stands out at 46.6%.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
| Odometer | Tests ≥ threshold | Share of sample |
|---|---|---|
| 100,000+ miles | 1,913 | 46.64% |
Of 4,102 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 46.6% had reached 100k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.
Mercedes-Benz ML faults that come together
Lamps & electrical + Seatbelts & SRS stand out at 5.51×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.
above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less
| Group A | Group B | Together | Lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 28 | 5.51× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Noise, emissions and leaks | 38 | 4.35× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Noise, emissions and leaks | 57 | 4.07× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 105 | 3.8× (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Tyres | 30 | 3.72× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Suspension | 72 | 3.47× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Tyres | 85 | 3.33× (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Visibility | 24 | 3.25× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Tyres | 51 | 3.21× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Noise, emissions and leaks | 27 | 2.81× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Suspension | 93 | 2.79× (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Suspension | 29 | 2.75× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Visibility | 62 | 2.66× (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Visibility | 38 | 2.61× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 78 | 2.57× (rough estimate) |
| Tyres | Visibility | 32 | 2.38× (rough estimate) |
| Suspension | Tyres | 43 | 2.24× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Brakes | 38 | 2.01× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Suspension | 43 | 1.88× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Visibility | 29 | 1.81× (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Tyres | 31 | 1.77× (rough estimate) |
| Suspension | Visibility | 31 | 1.77× (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Steering | 18 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | Road Wheels | 14 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 12 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | Suspension | 12 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Steering | 11 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | Visibility | 11 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Identification of the vehicle | Suspension | 10 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | Tyres | 10 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Steering | 9 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Steering | 9 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Steering | Suspension | 9 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Body, chassis, structure | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 9 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems | 8 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Road Wheels | Suspension | 8 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Identification of the vehicle | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 8 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Steering | Tyres | 8 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Identification of the vehicle | 7 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Road Wheels | Tyres | 7 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Steering | Visibility | 7 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Brakes | Road Wheels | 6 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Noise, emissions and leaks | Road Wheels | 5 | too few (rough estimate) |
| Road Wheels | Visibility | 5 | too few (rough estimate) |
Defects in «Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment» and «Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems» appear together 5.51× more often than chance (28 co-occurrences in the same test; 55 pairs compared).
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).
Mercedes-Benz ML MOT repair costs
The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £65.12 to £123.73, against £54.85 for the test itself.
bigger number = costs morepounds per test, MOT-failing faults only
| Component | Fails per 100 tests | Typical repair | Its price | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment | 16.3 (nat. 18.09) | Battery replacement (standard 12V lead-acid) | £140 | £22.82 |
| Brakes | 11.4 (nat. 11.25) | Front brake pads (parts + labour, typical hatchback) | £150 | £17.10 |
| Suspension | 9.5 (nat. 15.36) | Suspension coil spring (single corner) | £180 | £17.10 |
| Tyres | 9.0 (nat. 8.7) | Tyre (single mid-range 16" fitted) | £90 | £8.10 |
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 £65 to £124, 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 ML rust problems: where they corrode
Age-standardised corrosion susceptibility stands out at 2.2×, against 1.00× for the national age-standardised rate.
above 1.0× = rusts more than averagebelow 1.0× = rusts less
This Mercedes-Benz ML fails on corrosion far more often than average once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are about typical for the models we publish. Those two point in opposite directions, which is the informative case: it rusts more than average despite living in gentler places, so the cause is the car, not the postcode.
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 ML advisory become a failure?
Brakes are highest at 10.2%; Tyres are lowest at 9.6% — the gap is 0.6 percentage points.
higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability
| Component | Fails next time | Typical lead time | Miles of warning | Advisories tracked |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brakes | 10.2% | 12.1 months | 5,160 | 647 |
| Tyres | 9.6% | 12.2 months | 7,406 | 763 |
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 10 in 100 cars, and the median gap is 12.1 months and roughly 5,160 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 ML?
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment after a failure at age 15-19 are highest at 27.4%; Tyres after a passed at age 6-8 are lowest at 4.2% — the gap is 23.2 percentage points.
higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability
| Age | Last test | Most likely next failures | Cars tracked |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6-8 | passed | Suspension 6.8% · Body, chassis, structure 5.0% · Tyres 4.2% | 501 |
| 6-8 | advisory | Suspension 6.3% · Body, chassis, structure 5.9% · Visibility 5.9% | 255 (rough estimate) |
| 6-8 | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 9.7% · Suspension 9.7% · Visibility 7.9% | 216 (rough estimate) |
| 9-11 | passed | Suspension 7.8% · Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 7.7% · Body, chassis, structure 7.4% | 662 |
| 9-11 | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 11.1% · Suspension 9.7% · Tyres 7.4% | 404 (rough estimate) |
| 9-11 | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 17.7% · Suspension 10.6% · Body, chassis, structure 9.8% | 378 (rough estimate) |
| 12-14 | passed | Brakes 8.5% · Body, chassis, structure 7.3% · Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 5.3% | 247 (rough estimate) |
| 12-14 | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 17.8% · Brakes 11.5% · Body, chassis, structure 9.1% | 208 (rough estimate) |
| 12-14 | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 22.8% · Brakes 14.7% · Body, chassis, structure 10.8% | 232 (rough estimate) |
| 15-19 | passed | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 16.7% · Body, chassis, structure 12.5% · Suspension 9.7% | 72 (rough estimate) |
| 15-19 | advisory | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 17.3% · Suspension 13.3% · Body, chassis, structure 9.3% | 75 (rough estimate) |
| 15-19 | failure | Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment 27.4% · Brakes 21.9% · Suspension 15.1% | 73 (rough estimate) |
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 ML ownership: what six years of MOTs show
The ten-day re-test pass rate is highest at 66.2%; The later re-test pass rate is lowest at 5.0% — the gap is 61.2 percentage points.
higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points
Failing is usually a same-week event, not a disaster. Of 786 failures followed through to their re-test, 28.88% were repaired and passed the same day and 66.16% within ten days; the median gap is 1 day. 1,767 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 0.386 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 6,162 miles a year across 745 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. 39.15% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 31.69% 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: 0.805% of 745 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 38,215 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 ML safety recalls and how to check yours
DVSA recall campaigns stand out at 12.
bigger number = more recorded casescompare like-for-like scope, not sample size alone
recall campaigns launched per year
| Reference | Launched | Vehicles | Concern |
|---|---|---|---|
R/2023/023 | 20/02/2023 | 51,251 | On affected vehicles the aluminium bolts of the steering gear could corrode and break due |
R/2023/021 | 20/02/2023 | 31,569 | On affected vehicles water might accumulate in the spare wheel well. The water could brie |
R/2022/279 | 30/09/2022 | 218 | The function of the brake booster might be affected due to advanced corrosion in the joint |
R/2022/278 | 30/09/2022 | 6,442 | The function of the brake booster might be affected due to advanced corrosion in the joint |
R/2022/140 | 24/05/2022 | 1,631 | THE FUNCTION OF THE BRAKE BOOSTER MIGHT BE AFFECTED DUE TO ADVANCED CORROSION IN THE JOINT |
All 12 campaigns
| Reference | Launched | Build dates | Vehicles | Concern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
R/2023/023 | 20/02/2023 | 21/09/2011 – 02/02/2017 | 51,251 | On affected vehicles the aluminium bolts of the steering gear could corrode and break due |
R/2023/021 | 20/02/2023 | 21/09/2011 – 10/11/2018 | 31,569 | On affected vehicles water might accumulate in the spare wheel well. The water could brie |
R/2022/279 | 30/09/2022 | 01/03/2005 – 04/02/2013 | 218 | The function of the brake booster might be affected due to advanced corrosion in the joint |
R/2022/278 | 30/09/2022 | 01/03/2005 – 04/02/2013 | 6,442 | The function of the brake booster might be affected due to advanced corrosion in the joint |
R/2022/140 | 24/05/2022 | 01/03/2005 – 04/02/2013 | 1,631 | THE FUNCTION OF THE BRAKE BOOSTER MIGHT BE AFFECTED DUE TO ADVANCED CORROSION IN THE JOINT |
R/2022/137 | 24/05/2022 | 01/03/2005 – 04/02/2013 | 31,666 | THE FUNCTION OF THE BRAKE BOOSTER MIGHT BE AFFECTED DUE TO ADVANCED CORROSION IN THE JOINT |
R/2020/243 | 06/10/2020 | 08/11/2011 – 31/05/2018 | 994 | ENGINE CONTROL UNIT SOFTWARE TO BE UPDATED |
R/2020/231 | 03/09/2020 | 24/02/2012 – 06/06/2017 | 1,230 | SOFTWARE UPDATE TO IMPROVE EMISSIONS |
R/2017/012 | 14/02/2017 | 01/09/2014 – 30/03/2015 | 3 | FRONT AND/OR REAR AXLE BOLTS MAY NOT BE TIGHTENED CORRECTLY |
R/2016/299 | 30/01/2017 | 01/07/2014 – 30/09/2016 | 3,993 | FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG MAY BE DEACTIVATED |
R/2016/150 | 18/07/2016 | 01/04/2015 – 31/08/2015 | 54 | THREADED CONNECTION OF THE RIGHT REAR SEAT BELT END FITTING MAY FAIL IN A COLLISION |
R/2011/131 | 31/10/2011 | 20,276 | CRUISE CONTROL MAY FAIL TO DEACTIVATE |
DVSA lists 12 safety recall campaigns for the Mercedes-Benz ML, covering roughly 149,327 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 ML MOT: quick answers
Mercedes-Benz ML MOT Risk Index is well below the reference at 70.6, 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 ML first-time MOT pass rate?
- 73.02% of first attempts passed in 2024 (593 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 26.98% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 593 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 70.6 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.
Compare the Mercedes-Benz ML with other cars
MINI GT is highest at 71.0; Mercedes-Benz ML is lowest at 70.6 — the gap is 0.4 points.
below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age
Same brand
All Mercedes-Benz MOT statisticsMercedes-Benz SLC MOT statsMercedes-Benz GLE MOT stats
Similar risk
Land Rover Range Rover (index 70.9)Mercedes-Benz SLC (index 70.9)MINI GT (index 71.0)
Same size class
how Saab 9000 compareshow Mercedes-Benz 420 compareshow Rolls-Royce Wraith compares
By area
Mercedes-Benz ML MOT failure rate by postcode area
By failure group
Mercedes-Benz ML body, chassis and structure failuresMercedes-Benz ML brakes failuresMercedes-Benz ML lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresMercedes-Benz ML noise, emissions and leaks failuresMercedes-Benz ML road wheels failuresMercedes-Benz ML seat belts and airbags failuresMercedes-Benz ML steering failuresMercedes-Benz ML suspension failuresMercedes-Benz ML tyres failuresMercedes-Benz ML visibility failures
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-ml-review-9e20e6f0:dvsa-2024-v2. Full method: methodology.
Cite: MOT Risk Index (2026). Mercedes-Benz ML 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-ml-review-9e20e6f0/ · Published 2026-07-30.