Toyota RAV4 2020 MOT pass rate by postcode area
The Toyota RAV4 2020 MOT pass rate by postcode area runs from 98.5% in ME down to 89.3% in AB — 9.2 points apart for the same model, the same model year and the same test. Below are all 74 postcode areas that tested enough of them to publish.
What a 9.2-point gap means
Pinned to one model year, this is not a table of old cars: every 2020 Toyota RAV4 in the data is the same age. Over five annual MOTs the gap between the best and worst area is 0.5 extra failures — about £14–£36 in parts at this model's typical failure cost .
162 of 170 models by how far apart their best and worst postcode area are. Wider: Suzuki Vitara (9.2). Narrower: SEAT Arona (9.1).
Rates are for the 2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
| AB | 89.3% | 244 |
| PO | 89.8% | 420 |
| AL | 89.8% | 423 |
| SG | 90.8% | 415 |
| PE | 92.0% | 875 |
| EX | 92.3% | 390 |
| BS | 92.7% | 701 |
| SN | 93.0% | 228 |
| OX | 93.0% | 414 |
| TW | 93.2% | 454 |
| TN | 93.4% | 729 |
| BA | 93.5% | 367 |
| WD | 93.6% | 329 |
| WV | 94.0% | 201 |
| NN | 94.0% | 537 |
| GU | 94.1% | 597 |
| LU | 94.2% | 276 |
| NE | 94.3% | 470 |
| CM | 94.3% | 580 |
| ST | 94.6% | 370 |
| CB | 94.6% | 296 |
| IP | 94.6% | 279 |
| WA | 94.7% | 430 |
| YO | 94.7% | 359 |
| M | 95.1% | 473 |
| CH | 95.2% | 315 |
| BH | 95.2% | 252 |
| NW | 95.3% | 590 |
| BR | 95.3% | 236 |
| CT | 95.3% | 236 |
| NG | 95.4% | 587 |
| CF | 95.4% | 524 |
| SK | 95.5% | 580 |
| G | 95.6% | 452 |
| CO | 95.6% | 294 |
| NR | 95.6% | 504 |
| LE | 95.7% | 602 |
| NP | 95.8% | 213 |
| MK | 95.8% | 570 |
| BD | 95.8% | 285 |
| SS | 95.8% | 311 |
| B | 95.9% | 957 |
| RH | 95.9% | 517 |
| HD | 96.0% | 223 |
| LS | 96.0% | 300 |
| RM | 96.0% | 301 |
| EH | 96.1% | 540 |
| BN | 96.1% | 516 |
| CV | 96.2% | 504 |
| HP | 96.2% | 426 |
| DN | 96.4% | 466 |
| CR | 96.4% | 466 |
| PR | 96.4% | 334 |
| UB | 96.5% | 227 |
| RG | 96.5% | 805 |
| WF | 96.6% | 206 |
| S | 96.6% | 979 |
| LL | 96.8% | 403 |
| FK | 96.8% | 218 |
| BB | 96.8% | 219 |
| OL | 96.9% | 223 |
| SO | 96.9% | 481 |
| SA | 97.0% | 494 |
| IV | 97.0% | 234 |
| EN | 97.0% | 304 |
| CA | 97.1% | 238 |
| SW | 97.1% | 310 |
| GL | 97.1% | 315 |
| BL | 97.3% | 370 |
| L | 97.4% | 308 |
| DE | 97.4% | 625 |
| DA | 97.4% | 391 |
| IG | 98.0% | 353 |
| ME | 98.5% | 481 |
“vs national” is against this model's own rate across all years (86.6%), 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 12 points above its own all-years national rate.