Do you think it's unreasonable for a 2002 model car to be so rusty that it has to be scrapped?

I recently had to scrap my 2002 KA Ford because there was so much rust that it failed it's MOT. The cost of welding it would have be more than the cars worth. I phoned a local garage and they told me that they had just had another KA in with almost identical problems and had advised it to be scrapped. When I took it to be scrapped I talked to the people there and they said KA cars were the worst they had ever seen for rust.

I don't know what the body was made of but I was told even people who had their KA's regularly serviced at the Ford dealer and welded still ended up with having to scrap the cars due to rust.

It seems to me that someone should complain to Ford. But would that be unreasonable not to expect a car to rust so badly in such a short period. I was not driving very much since I've been in and out of jobs.

Well if it sat outside for 12 years in very wet conditions and nobody really ever bothered to take care of it it's not impossible

2002 was 12 years ago and that's longer than some cars last.
Also Kas are well known for their rusting, had you done some research before you bought it you'd have found this out.
Also they tend to be owned by people who for financial reasons don't look after the m and rather than treat the rust, just ignore it or at best paint over it.

Short answer, no. You'd be wasting your time complaining to Ford.

You're talking about a 12 year old car made from the equivalent of baked bean tins.

Parked up cars rust quicker than those in daily use.

Complain to Ford all you like they won't be interested in 12 year old history, have you not heard of built in obsolescence?

This model of Ford Ka was designed to last 7 years. Some last a little more. But often less, a lot less. At least it didn't collapse on you whilst it was being driven. Did you wash it in accordance with the instructions in the Handbook? If not, best of luck with an anti-perforation warranty claim.