MOT Risk Index.co.uk

Peugeot 106 MOT pass rate and common problems

62.7% of Peugeot 106s passed the 2024 MOT (5,029 first tests): 55.9% at the first attempt and 6.8% after a fix at the test centre (PRS). About 2 in 5 failed the first attempt. For its age, it fails 15% more often than normal: MOT Risk Index 115.0 (95% CI 111.5–118.6; 100 = normal).

Peugeot 106 at a glance, 2024 MOT
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
MOT pass rate62.7%incl. 6.8% fixed at the test centre20245029
Passed at the first attempt55.9%all first tests20245029
MOT Risk Index (95% CI 111.5–118.6)115.0index100 = normal for its age · rank 602 (tied) of 761 (1 = fails least for its age)20245029
Biggest excess: Noise, emissions and leaks22.6per 1009.9 same-age2019–202453365
Dangerous defects13.7per 10011.2 UK, not age-adjusted2019–202453365
Advisory items144.1per 100127.1 UK, not age-adjusted2019–202453365
strip · Peugeot 106 · MOT Risk Index · 115 vs 100 = normal · 2024
MOT Risk Index · Peugeot 106. 0–240; 100 = normal for its age; median model 92.8 · rank 602 (tied) of 761 (1 = fails least for its age). It would rank between 572 and 639 anywhere within its 95% interval, other models held where they are. DVSA, 2024.
Peugeot 106 index position among 761 models
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Rank602of 761published models, 1 = fails least for its age20245029
Best rank within its 95% interval572rankother models held where they are20245029
Worst rank within its 95% interval639rankother models held where they are20245029

Check this car by registration

Before you submit. Enter a UK registration to compare this vehicle with similar cars. We send the registration to the DVSA MOT History API, do not put it in the URL or send it to analytics, and keep any server-side cache for no more than 15 minutes. MOT history is free on GOV.UK; we do not sell it. Statistical information, not vehicle condition advice. Read how we use your data.

Download this page's numbers (CSV) · How to cite

Data release dvsa-2024-v2 (24 Sep 2026) · full dataset (v5). This model's index is unchanged in the 24 September 2026 release.

What actually fails on a Peugeot 106 MOT, and how often?

Peugeot 106 MOTs fail most often on ‘lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment’: 33 per 100 tests, against 37.6 for UK cars of the same age (2019–2024, n = 53,365).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment · 33 vs 37.6 · 2019–2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment33per 10037.62019–202417631
Brakes31.2per 10024.52019–202416626
Body, chassis, structure25.1per 10016.62019–202413387
Noise, emissions and leaks22.6per 1009.92019–202412073
Suspension18.3per 10030.32019–20249791
Visibility15.8per 10013.12019–20248458

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 53,365 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Will my Peugeot 106's advisory become a fail at the next MOT?

Peugeot 106 advisories turn into fails more often than on the median model: lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment advisories became a fail at the next MOT 30.1% of the time.

funnel · Peugeot 106 · Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment · 30.1 vs median model · 2019–2024
Advisories on lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment: 30.1 of 100 became a fail on the same item at the next MOT. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment30.1% next failmedian model2019–20241167
Body, chassis, structure25.3% next failmedian model2019–20244202
Brakes21.4% next failmedian model2019–20246439
Suspension19.1% next failmedian model2019–20245659
Noise, emissions and leaks17.6% next failmedian model2019–20245212
Tyres10.6% next failmedian model2019–20248056
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems7.6% next failmedian model2019–2024537
Identification of the vehicle5.6% next failmedian model2019–20241435
Full table
Further values · 2019–2024
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Non-component advisories0% next failmedian model2019–20241551

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

My Peugeot 106 got an MOT advisory: what gets flagged most?

Peugeot 106 MOTs flag tyres most: 37.4 advisories per 100 tests, against 39.7 across UK tests (2019–2024, n = 53,365).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Tyres · 37.4 vs 39.7 · 2019–2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Tyres37.4per 10039.72019–202419937
Brakes29.7per 10034.72019–202415857
Suspension27.5per 10026.22019–202414650
Noise, emissions and leaks15.9per 1005.22019–20248505
Body, chassis, structure15.3per 1004.62019–20248181
Non-component advisories5per 1007.82019–20242683

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 53,365 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

What is likely to fail next on a Peugeot 106?

For Peugeot 106s aged 20 or older whose last MOT was a fail, the item most likely to fail at the next MOT is ‘lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment’: 22.7% failed on it (2019–2024, n = 8,637).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Body, chassis, structure, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass · 13.2 vs baseline · 2019–2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Body, chassis, structure, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass13.2% next fail2019–20245289
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass12.5% next fail2019–20245289
Brakes, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass9.8% next fail2019–20245289
Visibility, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass8.4% next fail2019–20245289
Noise, emissions and leaks, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass7.5% next fail2019–20245289
Suspension, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass5.3% next fail2019–20245289
Steering, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass4.5% next fail2019–20245289
Tyres, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass3.7% next fail2019–20245289
Full table
Further values · 2019–2024
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass2.2% next fail2019–20245289
Identification of the vehicle, 15 to 19 years old, after a pass0.3% next fail2019–20245289
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory20.9% next fail2019–20244018
Body, chassis, structure, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory20.5% next fail2019–20244018
Brakes, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory15.5% next fail2019–20244018
Visibility, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory13.6% next fail2019–20244018
Noise, emissions and leaks, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory10.7% next fail2019–20244018
Suspension, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory10.4% next fail2019–20244018
Steering, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory8.4% next fail2019–20244018
Tyres, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory6.7% next fail2019–20244018
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory3.6% next fail2019–20244018
Identification of the vehicle, 15 to 19 years old, after an advisory0.7% next fail2019–20244018
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail26.6% next fail2019–20247669
Body, chassis, structure, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail22.3% next fail2019–20247669
Brakes, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail19.1% next fail2019–20247669
Visibility, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail15.2% next fail2019–20247669
Noise, emissions and leaks, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail14.2% next fail2019–20247669
Suspension, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail12.7% next fail2019–20247669
Steering, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail8.8% next fail2019–20247669
Tyres, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail7.2% next fail2019–20247669
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail5.4% next fail2019–20247669
Identification of the vehicle, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail0.7% next fail2019–20247669
Road wheels, 15 to 19 years old, after a fail0.1% next fail2019–20247669
Noise, emissions and leaks, 20 years or older, after a pass10.5% next fail2019–20246075
Body, chassis, structure, 20 years or older, after a pass10.3% next fail2019–20246075
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, 20 years or older, after a pass10.2% next fail2019–20246075
Brakes, 20 years or older, after a pass10.1% next fail2019–20246075
Suspension, 20 years or older, after a pass7.3% next fail2019–20246075
Visibility, 20 years or older, after a pass6.8% next fail2019–20246075
Steering, 20 years or older, after a pass3.1% next fail2019–20246075
Tyres, 20 years or older, after a pass3.0% next fail2019–20246075
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems, 20 years or older, after a pass1.6% next fail2019–20246075
Identification of the vehicle, 20 years or older, after a pass0.4% next fail2019–20246075
Road wheels, 20 years or older, after a pass0.1% next fail2019–20246075
Body, chassis, structure, 20 years or older, after an advisory18.2% next fail2019–20245196
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, 20 years or older, after an advisory17.6% next fail2019–20245196
Brakes, 20 years or older, after an advisory15.1% next fail2019–20245196
Noise, emissions and leaks, 20 years or older, after an advisory14.5% next fail2019–20245196
Suspension, 20 years or older, after an advisory12.6% next fail2019–20245196
Visibility, 20 years or older, after an advisory11.6% next fail2019–20245196
Steering, 20 years or older, after an advisory5.7% next fail2019–20245196
Tyres, 20 years or older, after an advisory5.6% next fail2019–20245196
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems, 20 years or older, after an advisory2.9% next fail2019–20245196
Identification of the vehicle, 20 years or older, after an advisory0.5% next fail2019–20245196
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, 20 years or older, after a fail22.7% next fail2019–20248637
Noise, emissions and leaks, 20 years or older, after a fail21.2% next fail2019–20248637
Body, chassis, structure, 20 years or older, after a fail20.9% next fail2019–20248637
Brakes, 20 years or older, after a fail20.3% next fail2019–20248637
Suspension, 20 years or older, after a fail15.0% next fail2019–20248637
Visibility, 20 years or older, after a fail14.1% next fail2019–20248637
Tyres, 20 years or older, after a fail6.4% next fail2019–20248637
Steering, 20 years or older, after a fail6.1% next fail2019–20248637
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems, 20 years or older, after a fail3.4% next fail2019–20248637
Identification of the vehicle, 20 years or older, after a fail0.5% next fail2019–20248637
Speedometer and speed limiter, 20 years or older, after a fail0.1% next fail2019–20248637
Road wheels, 20 years or older, after a fail0.1% next fail2019–20248637
Brakes, an unknown age, after a fail (rough estimate: 107 cars)13.1% next fail2019–2024107
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment, an unknown age, after a fail (rough estimate: 107 cars)10.3% next fail2019–2024107
Suspension, an unknown age, after a fail (rough estimate: 107 cars)9.3% next fail2019–2024107
Noise, emissions and leaks, an unknown age, after a fail (rough estimate: 107 cars)8.4% next fail2019–2024107
Body, chassis, structure, an unknown age, after a fail (rough estimate: 107 cars)7.5% next fail2019–2024107
Visibility, an unknown age, after a fail (rough estimate: 107 cars)6.5% next fail2019–2024107

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

How often does a Peugeot 106 get a dangerous MOT defect?

The Peugeot 106 gets a dangerous defect more often than the UK average: 13.7 per 100 first tests against 11.2 across the UK. A dangerous defect means the vehicle should not be driven away until it is fixed. In the same tests, 129.0 major and 23.6 minor defects were recorded per 100 tests (one test can record several).

bullet · Peugeot 106 · Dangerous defects · 13.7 vs 11.2 · 2019–2024
Dangerous defects: 13.7 vs 11.2. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Dangerous defects13.7per 10011.22019–202453365

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 53,365 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id; severity not recorded for some 2018–2021 tests · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

How does the Peugeot 106 compare with cars of its own age and size?

At every age shown, Peugeot 106s fail first time no more often than comparable models of the same size class; the biggest difference is at age 16, where they fail less often: 47.6% against 50.0% (2024, n = 1,728).

line · Peugeot 106 · Age 16 · 47.6 vs 50.0 · 2024
Age 16: 47.6. Age 20: 49.0. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Age 1647.6% fail50.020241728
Age 1749.2% fail50.520244400
Age 1849.2% fail50.920246475
Age 1948.3% fail50.420246698
Age 2049.0% fail49.620245923

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Which Peugeot 106 years should I avoid?

Peugeot 106 build years range from index 93.1 to 100.7 against the model's own age norm of 100 (2019–2024, n = 5,029).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Build year 1998 (better for its age) (rough estimate: 2,973 tests, 95% interval 89.7–99.6) · 94.7 vs 100 = normal · 2019–2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Build year 1998 (better for its age) (rough estimate: 2,973 tests, 95% interval 89.7–99.6)94.7index vs own age100 = normal2019–20242973
Build year 1999 (rough estimate: 1,648 tests, 95% interval 93.8–107.6)100.7index vs own age100 = normal2019–20241648
Build year 2000100.4index vs own age100 = normal2019–20244653
Build year 200199index vs own age100 = normal2019–20249749
Build year 200298.1index vs own age100 = normal2019–202411064
Build year 2003 (better for its age)93.1index vs own age100 = normal2019–20246072

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

How much does it cost to fix a Peugeot 106 MOT fail?

Expected repair cost per Peugeot 106 MOT: about £171 (up to about £325 if more expensive parts are needed), from the chance of failing each item and its most common UK repair price (catalogue estimate, n = 5,029).

Computed, not measured.

bar · Peugeot 106 · Expected repair bill · 171.1 vs modal price catalogue · price catalogue
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (price catalogue)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Expected repair bill171.1GBP estimatemodal price catalogueprice catalogue5029
Estimated range lower171.1GBP estimatemodal price catalogueprice catalogue5029
Estimated range upper325.2GBP estimatemodal price catalogueprice catalogue5029
Brakes: Front brake pads (parts + labour, typical hatchback)46.8GBP expected contribution150price catalogue5029
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment: Battery replacement (standard 12V lead-acid)46.2GBP expected contribution140price catalogue5029
Noise, emissions and leaks: Exhaust rear silencer45.2GBP expected contribution200price catalogue5029
Suspension: Suspension coil spring (single corner)32.9GBP expected contribution180price catalogue5029

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: price catalogue · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: computed estimate, not measured · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Is the Peugeot 106 more reliable than similar cars?

Of 8 similar models, 3 fail less often for their age than the Peugeot 106 and 5 as often or more. The Peugeot 106 has an MOT Risk Index of 115.0, where 100 = normal for its age (2024, n = 5,029).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Peugeot 106 (this model) · 115 vs 100 = normal · 2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Peugeot 106 (this model)115index100 = normal20245029
Chevrolet Matiz117.5index115202410142
Hyundai Amica101.2index11520245785
Nissan Pulsar113.9index115202421130
Smart Forfour115index115202423936
Suzuki Baleno128.4index11520246753
Smart City-Coupe98.6index11520244878
Volkswagen Fox116index115202426107
Full table
Further values · 2024
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Renault Twingo116.7index115202425011

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Does high mileage mean more Peugeot 106 MOT failures at the same age?

At ages 15+, 38.2% of Peugeot 106s with under 40,000 miles failed first time, against 44.4% of those with over 140,000 miles (2024, n = 552). No clear mileage gap inside this age group, among cars still being tested.

bar · Peugeot 106 · Age 15+, <40k miles (rough estimate: 419 tests, 95% interval 33.7–42.9%) · 38.2 vs baseline · 2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Age 15+, <40k miles (rough estimate: 419 tests, 95% interval 33.7–42.9%)38.2% failed first time2024419
Age 15+, 40-70k miles42.6% failed first time20241016
Age 15+, 70-100k miles49.9% failed first time2024977
Age 15+, 100-140k miles54.2% failed first time2024541
Age 15+, 140k+ miles (rough estimate: 133 tests, 95% interval 36.2–52.8%)44.4% failed first time2024133

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

How many miles does a Peugeot 106 last?

25.2% of Peugeot 106s tested had reached 100,000 miles, and 3.6% had reached 150,000 (2024, n = 13,335).

line · Peugeot 106 · 100,000 miles · 25.2 vs baseline · 2024
100,000 miles: 25.2. 200,000 miles (rou: 0.4. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
100,000 miles25.2% of tested cars202413335
150,000 miles3.6% of tested cars20241896
200,000 miles (rough estimate: 225 tests, 95% interval 0.4–0.5%)0.4% of tested cars2024225

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Is the Peugeot 106 driven more or less than average, and does that change the picture?

Matched on annual mileage as well as age, the Peugeot 106 index is 120.0, against 112.7 on age alone (2019–2024, n = 5,029).

slope · Peugeot 106 · Age and mileage adjusted index · 120 vs 112.7 · 2019–2024
Age and mileage adjusted index: 112.7 vs 120. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Age and mileage adjusted index120index112.72019–20245029

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Which Peugeot 106 fuel fails its MOT less?

All Peugeot 106s tested were petrol: 44.7% failed first time (2024, n = 4,452).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Petrol · 44.7 vs other fuels · 2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Petrol44.7% fail first timeother fuels20244452

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Which Peugeot 106 engine is best?

For its age, the best Peugeot 106 engine is the diesel 1.5–1.8 litre at index 94.0, and the worst the petrol 1.0–1.2 litre at 104.0, where 100 = the model's own average (2024, n = 5,029).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Petrol 1.5–1.8 litre (rough estimate: 3,344 tests, 95% interval 75.7–82.8) · 79.2 vs 100 = model average · 2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Petrol 1.5–1.8 litre (rough estimate: 3,344 tests, 95% interval 75.7–82.8)79.2index vs model norm100 = model average20243344
Diesel 1.2–1.5 litre (rough estimate: 355 tests, 95% interval 71.3–93.5)82.1index vs model norm100 = model average2024355
Petrol 1.2–1.5 litre (rough estimate: 3,325 tests, 95% interval 81.9–89.1)85.5index vs model norm100 = model average20243325
Diesel 1.5–1.8 litre94index vs model norm100 = model average20245800
Petrol 1.0–1.2 litre104index vs model norm100 = model average202437886
Petrol under 1.0 litre (rough estimate: 713 tests, 95% interval 96.2–112.6)104.3index vs model norm100 = model average2024713

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Where in Britain does the Peugeot 106 fail its MOT most?

First-time failure rates for the Peugeot 106 range from 37.9% in the Kingston upon Thames (KT) postcode area to 57.3% in the Brighton (BN) postcode area, before allowing for age: a wider spread by area than for the typical model.

map · Peugeot 106 · Brighton (BN) · 57.3 vs 44.1 · 2024
Scotland. N. England. Wales. London. S. West. % failing. 40%. 57%. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Brighton (BN)57.3% fail first time44.12024858
Torquay (TQ)57.1% fail first time44.12024574
Bristol (BS)56.3% fail first time44.120241070
Southend-on-Sea (SS) (rough estimate: 369 tests, 95% interval 25.6–34.9%)30.1% fail first time44.12024369
Enfield (EN) (rough estimate: 287 tests, 95% interval 25.6–36.2%)30.7% fail first time44.12024287
Romford (RM) (rough estimate: 188 tests, 95% interval 28.1–41.6%)34.6% fail first time44.12024188
Plymouth (PL)55.5% fail first time44.120241033
Bath (BA)55.3% fail first time44.12024864
Full table
Further values · 2024
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Exeter (EX)55.1% fail first time44.120241315
Kirkcaldy (KY) (rough estimate: 234 tests, 95% interval 48.3–61.0%)54.7% fail first time44.12024234
Huddersfield (HD) (rough estimate: 116 tests, 95% interval 45.3–63.1%)54.3% fail first time44.12024116
Stoke-on-Trent (ST) (rough estimate: 483 tests, 95% interval 49.4–58.2%)53.8% fail first time44.12024483
Dorchester (DT) (rough estimate: 492 tests, 95% interval 48.6–57.4%)53.0% fail first time44.12024492
Oxford (OX)52.6% fail first time44.12024698
Portsmouth (PO)52.5% fail first time44.120241245
Carlisle (CA) (rough estimate: 247 tests, 95% interval 46.0–58.4%)52.2% fail first time44.12024247
Norwich (NR)52.0% fail first time44.120241011
Chester (CH) (rough estimate: 461 tests, 95% interval 47.3–56.4%)51.8% fail first time44.12024461
Truro (TR)51.5% fail first time44.120241148
Salisbury (SP)51.3% fail first time44.12024599
Bournemouth (BH)51.0% fail first time44.120241013
Canterbury (CT)50.7% fail first time44.12024758
Worcester (WR)50.5% fail first time44.12024554
Liverpool (L) (rough estimate: 218 tests, 95% interval 43.9–57.0%)50.5% fail first time44.12024218
Leeds (LS) (rough estimate: 364 tests, 95% interval 45.2–55.4%)50.3% fail first time44.12024364
Peterborough (PE)50.0% fail first time44.120241029
Nottingham (NG)49.8% fail first time44.120241006
Doncaster (DN) (rough estimate: 418 tests, 95% interval 45.0–54.5%)49.8% fail first time44.12024418
Lancaster (LA) (rough estimate: 350 tests, 95% interval 44.5–54.9%)49.7% fail first time44.12024350
Northampton (NN)49.6% fail first time44.12024676
Cambridge (CB) (rough estimate: 343 tests, 95% interval 44.3–54.8%)49.6% fail first time44.12024343
Shrewsbury (SY)49.3% fail first time44.12024578
Ipswich (IP)49.3% fail first time44.12024931
Bradford (BD) (rough estimate: 297 tests, 95% interval 43.2–54.5%)48.8% fail first time44.12024297
Gloucester (GL)48.7% fail first time44.12024938
Swansea (SA)47.9% fail first time44.12024741
Southampton (SO)47.9% fail first time44.120241001
Tonbridge (TN)47.8% fail first time44.120241026
York (YO) (rough estimate: 447 tests, 95% interval 43.1–52.3%)47.6% fail first time44.12024447
Guildford (GU)47.5% fail first time44.120241165
Crewe (CW) (rough estimate: 282 tests, 95% interval 41.8–53.3%)47.5% fail first time44.12024282
Walsall (WS)47.5% fail first time44.12024518
Medway (ME)47.4% fail first time44.12024658
Swindon (SN)47.4% fail first time44.12024802
Taunton (TA)47.1% fail first time44.12024694
Cardiff (CF)46.7% fail first time44.12024670
St Albans (AL) (rough estimate: 213 tests, 95% interval 39.9–53.2%)46.5% fail first time44.12024213
Hereford (HR)46.1% fail first time44.12024507
Watford (WD) (rough estimate: 165 tests, 95% interval 38.6–53.7%)46.1% fail first time44.12024165
Newcastle (NE) (rough estimate: 376 tests, 95% interval 40.8–50.8%)45.7% fail first time44.12024376
Newport (NP) (rough estimate: 389 tests, 95% interval 40.6–50.5%)45.5% fail first time44.12024389
Blackpool (FY) (rough estimate: 211 tests, 95% interval 38.5–51.8%)45.0% fail first time44.12024211
Stockport (SK) (rough estimate: 417 tests, 95% interval 40.1–49.6%)44.8% fail first time44.12024417
Colchester (CO) (rough estimate: 415 tests, 95% interval 39.9–49.4%)44.6% fail first time44.12024415
Edinburgh (EH) (rough estimate: 292 tests, 95% interval 38.9–50.3%)44.5% fail first time44.12024292
Lincoln (LN) (rough estimate: 304 tests, 95% interval 38.9–50.0%)44.4% fail first time44.12024304
Hemel Hempstead (HP) (rough estimate: 426 tests, 95% interval 39.7–49.1%)44.4% fail first time44.12024426
Birmingham (B)44.2% fail first time44.120241410
Luton (LU) (rough estimate: 154 tests, 95% interval 36.6–52.1%)44.2% fail first time44.12024154
Preston (PR) (rough estimate: 369 tests, 95% interval 38.9–49.0%)43.9% fail first time44.12024369
London SW (SW) (rough estimate: 374 tests, 95% interval 38.9–48.9%)43.9% fail first time44.12024374
Wolverhampton (WV) (rough estimate: 357 tests, 95% interval 38.6–48.9%)43.7% fail first time44.12024357
Redhill (RH)43.5% fail first time44.12024806
Reading (RG)43.3% fail first time44.12024774
Hull (HU) (rough estimate: 176 tests, 95% interval 36.1–50.6%)43.2% fail first time44.12024176
Blackburn (BB) (rough estimate: 329 tests, 95% interval 37.9–48.6%)43.2% fail first time44.12024329
Paisley (PA) (rough estimate: 123 tests, 95% interval 34.7–51.9%)43.1% fail first time44.12024123
Telford (TF) (rough estimate: 202 tests, 95% interval 36.4–50.0%)43.1% fail first time44.12024202
Dudley (DY) (rough estimate: 490 tests, 95% interval 38.7–47.5%)43.1% fail first time44.12024490
Derby (DE)42.5% fail first time44.12024718
Llandudno (LL)42.3% fail first time44.12024863
Wigan (WN) (rough estimate: 123 tests, 95% interval 33.9–51.1%)42.3% fail first time44.12024123
Milton Keynes (MK) (rough estimate: 485 tests, 95% interval 37.7–46.5%)42.1% fail first time44.12024485
Stevenage (SG) (rough estimate: 452 tests, 95% interval 37.6–46.6%)42.0% fail first time44.12024452
Manchester (M) (rough estimate: 451 tests, 95% interval 37.4–46.5%)41.9% fail first time44.12024451
Leicester (LE)41.7% fail first time44.120241244
Durham (DH) (rough estimate: 186 tests, 95% interval 34.6–48.6%)41.4% fail first time44.12024186
Bolton (BL) (rough estimate: 155 tests, 95% interval 33.8–49.2%)41.3% fail first time44.12024155
London E (E) (rough estimate: 170 tests, 95% interval 34.1–48.7%)41.2% fail first time44.12024170
Darlington (DL) (rough estimate: 209 tests, 95% interval 34.7–47.9%)41.1% fail first time44.12024209
Bromley (BR) (rough estimate: 158 tests, 95% interval 33.8–48.9%)41.1% fail first time44.12024158
Chelmsford (CM)40.5% fail first time44.12024523
Sheffield (S)40.4% fail first time44.12024747
Harrow (HA) (rough estimate: 196 tests, 95% interval 33.7–47.3%)40.3% fail first time44.12024196
London N (N) (rough estimate: 291 tests, 95% interval 34.4–45.6%)39.9% fail first time44.12024291
London SE (SE) (rough estimate: 289 tests, 95% interval 34.0–45.2%)39.5% fail first time44.12024289
London NW (NW) (rough estimate: 160 tests, 95% interval 32.1–47.1%)39.4% fail first time44.12024160
Coventry (CV)39.4% fail first time44.120241176
Oldham (OL) (rough estimate: 214 tests, 95% interval 33.0–45.9%)39.3% fail first time44.12024214
Twickenham (TW) (rough estimate: 419 tests, 95% interval 34.6–43.9%)39.1% fail first time44.12024419
Inverness (IV) (rough estimate: 138 tests, 95% interval 31.4–47.5%)39.1% fail first time44.12024138
Glasgow (G) (rough estimate: 167 tests, 95% interval 31.9–46.5%)38.9% fail first time44.12024167
Uxbridge (UB) (rough estimate: 167 tests, 95% interval 31.9–46.5%)38.9% fail first time44.12024167
Sutton (SM) (rough estimate: 176 tests, 95% interval 31.8–46.0%)38.6% fail first time44.12024176
Slough (SL) (rough estimate: 299 tests, 95% interval 32.8–43.8%)38.1% fail first time44.12024299
Kingston upon Thames (KT)37.9% fail first time44.12024515
Cleveland (TS) (rough estimate: 270 tests, 95% interval 32.2–43.7%)37.8% fail first time44.12024270
Kilmarnock (KA) (rough estimate: 104 tests, 95% interval 28.8–47.1%)37.5% fail first time44.12024104
Wakefield (WF) (rough estimate: 283 tests, 95% interval 32.0–43.2%)37.5% fail first time44.12024283
Warrington (WA) (rough estimate: 282 tests, 95% interval 31.8–43.0%)37.2% fail first time44.12024282
Aberdeen (AB) (rough estimate: 158 tests, 95% interval 29.6–44.5%)36.7% fail first time44.12024158
Croydon (CR) (rough estimate: 284 tests, 95% interval 29.9–40.9%)35.2% fail first time44.12024284
Dartford (DA) (rough estimate: 293 tests, 95% interval 29.9–40.8%)35.1% fail first time44.12024293

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Does a Peugeot 106 rust more than average?

Allowing for age, Peugeot 106 MOTs record corrosion failures at 0.3 times the national rate: 0.22% of tests against 0.77% (2024 + geographic layers, n = 3,142).

Computed, not measured.

slope · Peugeot 106 · Salt belt susceptibility · 0.3 vs 1 · 2024 + geographic layers
Salt belt susceptibility: 1 vs 0.3. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024 + geographic layers)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Salt belt susceptibility0.3ratio estimate12024 + geographic layers3142

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 + geographic layers · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: computed estimate, not measured · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Is a Peugeot 106 ULEZ compliant?

An estimated 0.5% of Peugeot 106s tested are likely ULEZ-compliant, judged from fuel type and first-use date; check a specific car with TfL's vehicle checker (2024).

Computed, not measured.

stacked · Peugeot 106 · Likely compliant · 0.5 vs baseline · 2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Likely compliant0.5% estimate20245029

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: computed estimate, not measured · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

What do six years of MOTs show about owning a Peugeot 106?

Of failed Peugeot 106 MOTs, 29.9% were retested the same day and a further 64.0% within 10 days; the median failed car passed its retest after 1 day (2019–2024, n = 16,566).

bar · Peugeot 106 · Same-day retest · 29.9 vs failed initial tests · 2019–2024
DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Same-day retest29.9%failed initial tests2019–202416566
Retest within 10 days64.0%failed initial tests2019–202416566
Clean MOT streak29.2%observed chains2019–20248959
Repeat advisory32.0%observed chains2019–20248959
Decreasing odometer1.6% mileage anomalyobserved chains2019–202411875

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

If a Peugeot 106 fails, does it fail again?

42.9% of Peugeot 106s that failed an MOT failed the next one too, against 37.7% after a pass (2019–2024, n = 4,481). The failure most likely to come back is visibility: 41.9% of those fails recurred at the next MOT.

bullet · Peugeot 106 · Repeat after fail · 42.9 vs 37.7 · 2019–2024
Repeat after fail: 42.9 vs 37.7. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2019–2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Repeat after fail42.9%37.72019–20244481

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2019–2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Which Peugeot 106 faults come together?

On Peugeot 106s, ‘lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment’ and speedometer and speed limiter failures turn up together 3.8 times as often as chance would predict (2024, n = 23).

Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Speedometer and speed limiter (rough estimate: 23 tests, 95% interval 2.4–5.7)3.8liftexpected joint rate202423
Road Wheels + Suspension (rough estimate: 25 tests, 95% interval 2.4–5.5)3.8liftexpected joint rate202425
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Road Wheels (rough estimate: 43 tests, 95% interval 2.7–5.0)3.7liftexpected joint rate202443
Identification of the vehicle + Tyres (rough estimate: 58 tests, 95% interval 2.5–4.3)3.4liftexpected joint rate202458
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems + Suspension3.0liftexpected joint rate2024649
Noise, emissions and leaks + Road Wheels (rough estimate: 25 tests, 95% interval 1.9–4.4)3.0liftexpected joint rate202425
Brakes + Road Wheels (rough estimate: 28 tests, 95% interval 1.9–4.2)2.9liftexpected joint rate202428
Body, chassis, structure + Road Wheels (rough estimate: 31 tests, 95% interval 1.9–4.0)2.9liftexpected joint rate202431
Full table
Further values · 2024
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Identification of the vehicle + Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment (rough estimate: 162 tests, 95% interval 2.4–3.3)2.8liftexpected joint rate2024162
Identification of the vehicle + Visibility (rough estimate: 101 tests, 95% interval 2.3–3.4)2.8liftexpected joint rate2024101
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems + Tyres (rough estimate: 313 tests, 95% interval 2.5–3.1)2.8liftexpected joint rate2024313
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems + Steering (rough estimate: 319 tests, 95% interval 2.4–3.0)2.7liftexpected joint rate2024319
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems2.7liftexpected joint rate20241003
Identification of the vehicle + Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (rough estimate: 28 tests, 95% interval 1.8–3.9)2.7liftexpected joint rate202428
Brakes + Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems2.5liftexpected joint rate2024778
Body, chassis, structure + Identification of the vehicle (rough estimate: 135 tests, 95% interval 2.1–3.0)2.5liftexpected joint rate2024135
Tyres + Visibility2.5liftexpected joint rate2024948
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Tyres2.5liftexpected joint rate20241511
Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems + Visibility2.5liftexpected joint rate2024570
Brakes + Suspension2.4liftexpected joint rate20242394
Brakes + Identification of the vehicle (rough estimate: 117 tests, 95% interval 2.0–2.9)2.4liftexpected joint rate2024117
Body, chassis, structure + Noise, emissions and leaks2.4liftexpected joint rate20243392
Brakes + Tyres2.4liftexpected joint rate20241225
Steering + Suspension2.4liftexpected joint rate2024892
Noise, emissions and leaks + Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems2.4liftexpected joint rate2024642
Identification of the vehicle + Noise, emissions and leaks (rough estimate: 99 tests, 95% interval 1.9–2.9)2.4liftexpected joint rate202499
Identification of the vehicle + Suspension (rough estimate: 78 tests, 95% interval 1.9–2.9)2.4liftexpected joint rate202478
Brakes + Noise, emissions and leaks2.3liftexpected joint rate20242903
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Steering2.3liftexpected joint rate20241496
Suspension + Tyres2.3liftexpected joint rate2024823
Identification of the vehicle + Steering (rough estimate: 42 tests, 95% interval 1.7–3.1)2.3liftexpected joint rate202442
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Visibility2.3liftexpected joint rate20242905
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Suspension2.3liftexpected joint rate20242677
Body, chassis, structure + Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems2.2liftexpected joint rate2024776
Brakes + Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment2.2liftexpected joint rate20243766
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Noise, emissions and leaks2.2liftexpected joint rate20243260
Noise, emissions and leaks + Suspension2.2liftexpected joint rate20241869
Brakes + Visibility2.1liftexpected joint rate20242233
Body, chassis, structure + Tyres2.1liftexpected joint rate20241215
Body, chassis, structure + Brakes2.1liftexpected joint rate20243296
Noise, emissions and leaks + Tyres2.0liftexpected joint rate2024921
Body, chassis, structure + Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment2.0liftexpected joint rate20243920
Body, chassis, structure + Suspension2.0liftexpected joint rate20242270
Steering + Tyres (rough estimate: 395 tests, 95% interval 1.8–2.3)2.0liftexpected joint rate2024395
Steering + Visibility2.0liftexpected joint rate2024808
Body, chassis, structure + Visibility1.9liftexpected joint rate20242333
Noise, emissions and leaks + Visibility1.9liftexpected joint rate20241794
Brakes + Steering1.9liftexpected joint rate20241041
Body, chassis, structure + Steering1.9liftexpected joint rate20241142
Suspension + Visibility1.9liftexpected joint rate20241375
Noise, emissions and leaks + Steering1.7liftexpected joint rate2024823
Road Wheels + Tyres (seen together; too few for a multiplier)17tests with both202417
Brakes + Speedometer and speed limiter (seen together; too few for a multiplier)17tests with both202417
Road Wheels + Seat belts and supplementary restraint systems (seen together; too few for a multiplier)16tests with both202416
Speedometer and speed limiter + Suspension (seen together; too few for a multiplier)15tests with both202415
Road Wheels + Steering (seen together; too few for a multiplier)15tests with both202415
Body, chassis, structure + Speedometer and speed limiter (seen together; too few for a multiplier)15tests with both202415
Road Wheels + Visibility (seen together; too few for a multiplier)15tests with both202415
Noise, emissions and leaks + Speedometer and speed limiter (seen together; too few for a multiplier)14tests with both202414
Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment + Seat belt installation check (seen together; too few for a multiplier)8tests with both20248
Brakes + Seat belt installation check (seen together; too few for a multiplier)6tests with both20246
Speedometer and speed limiter + Visibility (seen together; too few for a multiplier)6tests with both20246
Seat belt installation check + Suspension (seen together; too few for a multiplier)5tests with both20245
Seat belt installation check + Visibility (seen together; too few for a multiplier)5tests with both20245
Noise, emissions and leaks + Seat belt installation check (seen together; too few for a multiplier)5tests with both20245
Body, chassis, structure + Seat belt installation check (seen together; too few for a multiplier)5tests with both20245

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Has the Peugeot 106 had safety recalls?

DVSA lists 4 safety recall campaigns matched to the Peugeot 106; check whether yours has been fixed, using its registration number.

Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (DVSA register)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
DVSA recall campaigns matched4campaignsDVSA registerDVSA register5029

Source: DVSA register; recall effect covers 11 of 761 models · Window: DVSA register · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Does the Peugeot 106 fail inspections in other countries too?

In the Netherlands, 68.5% of Peugeot 106s failed their periodic roadworthiness inspection, against 50.8% for all cars there (2024 by country, n = 3,461 inspections).

Inspections abroad point the same way: in the Netherlands the Peugeot 106 also fails more often than the national average.

bullet · Peugeot 106 · Netherlands · 68.5 vs 50.8 · 2024 by country
Netherlands: 68.5 vs 50.8. Statens vegvesen PKK (CC BY 4.0), Traficom Katsastus (CC BY 4.0), RDW APK (CC0), adapted; covers 430 of 761 models, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024 by country)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
Netherlands68.5% failed50.82024 by country3461

Source: Statens vegvesen PKK (CC BY 4.0), Traficom Katsastus (CC BY 4.0), RDW APK (CC0), adapted; covers 430 of 761 models · Window: 2024 by country · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV · licences and full notice

Does the month of a Peugeot 106 MOT matter?

Peugeot 106s fail first time most in February (48.3%, against 30.0% for all cars that month) and least in June (45.3%) (2024, n = 5,029).

line · Peugeot 106 · January · 48.2 vs 31.1 · 2024
January: 48.2. December: 47.5. DVSA MOT bulk data, 24 Sep 2026.
Peugeot 106: the numbers behind this answer (2024)
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
January48.2% fail first time31.120245071
February48.3% fail first time30.020244909
March47.6% fail first time28.320245401
April45.3% fail first time29.820243329
May46.9% fail first time28.820243527
June45.3% fail first time28.120244111
July46.3% fail first time29.320244673
August45.9% fail first time29.220244788
Full table
Further values · 2024
MeasureValueUnitCompared withYearsTests
September46.2% fail first time28.220244797
October46.3% fail first time30.320245278
November47.8% fail first time30.620244682
December47.5% fail first time29.320242799

Source: DVSA MOT bulk data · Window: 2024 · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: one initial test per test_id · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

Not enough tests for… (and why)

Real-world MPG against the official figure (manufacturer level)

layer not yet computed for this model (covers 19 of 761 models). 5,029 initial Peugeot 106 tests are in the published model cohort.

Source: European Commission OBFCM; covers 19 of 761 models · Window: 2021+ cohorts · n = 5,029 (initial tests) · Method: computed estimate, not measured · Updated: 24 Sep 2026 · Release: dvsa-2024-v2 · CSV

See the Nissan Pulsar, a car of the same inspection class with 4.2× the tests · Check your car by registration

How to cite this page

MOT Risk Index (2026). Peugeot 106 MOT statistics 2024 (data release dvsa-2024-v2; full dataset motriskindex-families-2024-v5, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22975051), updated 24 September 2026. motriskindex.co.uk/cars/peugeot-106/

How the MOT Risk Index and every figure on this page are calculated: methodology.

Report an error

What is wrong on this page? One tap sends the category only, no text and nothing about you.

Peugeot 106 MOT: quick answers

What is the Peugeot 106 first-time MOT pass rate?

55.9% of first attempts passed in 2024 (5,029 tests). Retests after repair are excluded; cars fixed at the test centre (PRS) are shown separately.

Why does this number differ from other sites?

Other sites may count retests or all attempts. This page uses 5,029 primary tests: 44.14% failed first time and 62.7% passed when cars fixed at the test centre (PRS) count as passes. The age-adjusted MOT Risk Index 115 is shown separately.