2010 Peugeot 3008 1.6L Diesel · RJ10 UNM

The Peugeot 3008’s most recent MOT test on 2025-06-25 confirms it passed without defects, though it was preceded by a failed test just two days earlier at 142,269 miles—an unusual but not unprecedented anomaly. The broader trend over the past two years remains stable, with no recurring advisories or defects beyond the isolated 2025 failure. The 2024 and 2023 tests both passed cleanly, suggesting the vehicle has not experienced persistent mechanical issues requiring repeated intervention. However, the double-testing in July 2023 (a failed test at 134,375 miles followed by a pass at 134,379 miles) hints at a minor oversight rather than a systemic problem, as the vehicle cleared subsequent checks without incident. The recorded mileage of 142,275 miles over 16 years aligns with typical usage for this age, averaging around 8,900 miles annually—a rate that implies regular driving rather than prolonged neglect. There are no extended gaps between tests that would raise concern for deferred maintenance, though the 2025 double-testing period (a 48-hour interval) is unusual and may warrant questioning whether the vehicle was moved between tests or if the failure was procedural rather than mechanical. The 2023 to 2024 gap of just under a year also reflects consistent testing, with no evidence of skipped MOTs or accelerated wear from prolonged inactivity. Given the lack of recurring defects in the MOT history, the primary focus for an in-person inspection should centre on components prone to wear at this mileage: the suspension system, particularly the rear coil springs and bushes, which may exhibit perished rubber or excessive play; the brake calipers and discs, where binding or uneven wear could indicate past neglect; and the exhaust system, where corrosion or leaks might have gone unnoticed without visible defects during testing. The absence of advisories does not preclude underlying issues—tyre tread depth, for instance, should be verified beyond the MOT’s 1.6mm minimum, as failing twice on this criterion in the past suggests basic upkeep may have been inconsistent. Structural integrity, including underbody corrosion and frame condition, should also be scrutinised, especially given the vehicle’s age and typical exposure to UK road conditions.