Skoda Kodiaq 2019 MOT pass rate by postcode area
The Skoda Kodiaq 2019 MOT pass rate by postcode area runs from 95.8% in DA down to 81.0% in LE — 14.8 points apart for the same model, the same model year and the same test. Below are all 60 postcode areas that tested enough of them to publish.
What a 14.8-point gap means
Pinned to one model year, this is not a table of old cars: every 2019 Skoda Kodiaq in the data is the same age. Over five annual MOTs the gap between the best and worst area is 0.7 extra failures — about £30–£76 in parts at this model's typical failure cost .
116 of 170 models by how far apart their best and worst postcode area are. Wider: Hyundai Kona (14.8). Narrower: Audi A5 (14.7).
Rates are for the 2019 model year only, in areas with at least 200 tests of it. Mileage, trim and use are pooled — a city van and a motorway van are one line here. Method. Compare it with the model's full history or this exact year.
Every postcode area, worst first
| Area | Pass rate | Tests |
|---|---|---|
| LE | 81.0% | 543 |
| BS | 86.0% | 436 |
| NN | 86.2% | 334 |
| DN | 86.2% | 276 |
| AB | 86.3% | 300 |
| LS | 86.8% | 304 |
| EH | 87.0% | 529 |
| GU | 87.0% | 715 |
| SN | 87.0% | 324 |
| KT | 87.4% | 467 |
| WA | 87.4% | 294 |
| EX | 87.5% | 263 |
| SG | 87.8% | 294 |
| CM | 87.9% | 347 |
| RG | 88.2% | 634 |
| G | 88.8% | 464 |
| MK | 88.9% | 350 |
| CB | 89.1% | 274 |
| SA | 89.1% | 221 |
| RH | 89.1% | 599 |
| IP | 89.3% | 364 |
| WD | 89.3% | 253 |
| OX | 89.4% | 508 |
| DE | 89.4% | 292 |
| BA | 89.5% | 294 |
| PR | 89.5% | 238 |
| TN | 89.5% | 524 |
| B | 89.6% | 651 |
| HP | 89.6% | 336 |
| CH | 89.9% | 286 |
| CT | 90.0% | 219 |
| SW | 90.1% | 282 |
| BN | 90.1% | 262 |
| ME | 90.1% | 474 |
| NG | 90.2% | 429 |
| N | 90.6% | 320 |
| NR | 90.7% | 257 |
| YO | 90.7% | 248 |
| SO | 90.8% | 638 |
| SK | 90.8% | 326 |
| M | 90.8% | 229 |
| GL | 91.0% | 388 |
| IV | 91.0% | 212 |
| CV | 91.1% | 347 |
| BH | 91.2% | 306 |
| PO | 91.2% | 443 |
| TW | 91.3% | 343 |
| CF | 91.3% | 252 |
| S | 91.6% | 511 |
| BD | 91.7% | 205 |
| L | 92.0% | 237 |
| BL | 92.7% | 246 |
| NE | 92.8% | 530 |
| LN | 93.2% | 206 |
| PE | 93.7% | 431 |
| CR | 93.8% | 368 |
| SS | 93.9% | 212 |
| TS | 94.4% | 216 |
| E | 94.9% | 234 |
| DA | 95.8% | 332 |
“vs national” is against this model's own rate across all years (90.9%), not against the national rate for all cars — a number that would flatter a new model and punish an old one.
What this cannot tell you
- Which garage to use. There is no test-station field in the anonymised data, so no station is implicated by any of this — why. The station directory lists what is near you.
- That the area causes it. Cars in some areas do more short trips, see more salt, or have owners who wait for an advisory to become a failure. The test cannot separate those.
- Anything about a single car. These are rates over hundreds or thousands of tests, not a prediction for one vehicle — one car with a bad exhaust is one car with a bad exhaust.
For context, this model's best area runs 5 points above its own all-years national rate.