2010 Chevrolet Spark 1.0L Petrol · VE10 VSO

The Chevrolet Spark’s most recent MOT tests, conducted within a tight 30-day window in October 2025, reveal a concerning instability in roadworthiness despite no recorded defects on any pass or fail. The vehicle failed twice at 90,871 miles and once at 90,300 miles before passing at the same mileage—an anomaly that suggests either a temporary test centre error, a last-minute pre-test adjustment, or a critical component narrowly avoiding failure. The 2024 cycle mirrored this pattern, with a fail and pass at 83,710 miles, indicating a recurring issue that was not consistently resolved. While the absence of defects on passes implies no overt safety hazards were detected, the repeated failures at identical mileages warrant scrutiny of components prone to sudden degradation, such as brake calipers, suspension bushes, or electrical faults that might trigger intermittent test failures. The recorded mileage of 90,871 miles over 16 years equates to approximately 5,679 miles annually, a figure significantly lower than the UK average for a vehicle of this age. This suggests either minimal use or prolonged periods of inactivity, which could exacerbate wear on fluids, seals, and suspension components. Notably, there are no MOT records between October 2024 and October 2025, a gap of nearly a year, which is unusual for a vehicle in regular use. Such extended periods without testing may mask underlying issues, particularly in areas like corrosion or brake wear, which can develop silently over time. The lack of intermediate mileage data also prevents confirmation of whether the vehicle was driven consistently or stored for extended periods, which could impact components like tyres, battery health, or fuel system integrity. Given the pattern of repeated MOT failures at identical mileages, a buyer should prioritise an independent inspection of the braking system, particularly the rear calipers and discs, as binding or uneven wear is a common cause of test failures. The suspension, including coil springs, bushes, and shock absorbers, should be examined for uneven wear or corrosion, especially if the vehicle has spent time in wet or salted environments. Electrical faults, such as faulty sensors or wiring harnesses, could also explain the inconsistent test results, so the tester should verify all warning lights and diagnostic trouble codes. Structural integrity, particularly around wheel arches and underbody panels, should be assessed for corrosion, as this can compromise safety-critical components over time. While the MOT history does not indicate overt mechanical failures, the irregular pass/fail pattern demands thorough verification of these high-risk areas.