chaos.

I know that I will get flamed for this as I haven passed my test and I don't need reminding of that.

I'm thinking that people say undertaking is dangerous, is this because people take it for granted the you overtake on the right and the person that is in the right lane being undertook is not going to bother looking in his left hand mirror before moving back into the left hand lane?? Because if that's the case then thats just stupid. I'm talking about motorways and dule carridgeways here, not a road with a single lane.

You should use your mirrors to check the traffic around you at all times moving between lanes so it shouldn't matter if to pass on the right or left??

Flame away.

OllyK

Couple of points here which may clarify things
1) The no under taking is in reality a kick back to the days when cars only had offside mirrors and so you couldn't see if anything was coming up the inside - I admit this is not an issue these days.
2) The highway code is quite clear, once you have completed an overtaking manouver you should move over to the left most lane. This being the case, it should not be possible to undertake anybody in the first place.

The problem is that people do not stick to the highway code regarding moving over to the left, especially on motorways, another argument for a separate motorway test IMO. People get fustrated and undertake, personally I'd like to see Plod about more and pull BOTH of them.

ozzy

You are quite correct. You should always use your mirrors before signalling and attempting any manouvre. However, undertaking is only allowed in certain circumstances e.g. slow moving traffic in the right lane.

You have to follow all the rules as they stand unfortunately.

The times I've undertaken someone has always been because they are hogging the outside lane. If people observed correct lane discipline then it wouldn't be an issue IMHO. The amount of ***** you get sitting at 70mph in the fast lane when there's miles of empty carraigeway to the left is shocking.

Stefan

Bubba po

Muppet attack!

Jye

So is undertaking still illegal if you are in lane 1 and someone is in lane 3 for instance. I mean you arent really undertaking anything other than an empty lane. Why should you move out from lane 1 into lane 3 to overtake when there is nothing to actually overtake?

OllyK

Best one I saw on a truck's mud flaps:

< Suicide Passing Side >

OllyK

You have passed to the left of a vehicle on the same carriage way as yourself heading in the same direction, therefore you have undertaken them or passed them illegally.

Why should you have to move out?? Well you don't but if plod sees you expect to get pulled. Personally I think we need to get tougher on the lane hogs. People get fustrated and then try to undertake. The lane hog speeds up to try and stop them and that's how accidents happen.

chaos.

OK at least I'm right. I hate it when you get the ****ty astras hogging the fast clear lane trundling along Propre winds me up, either speed up or fek off

You see I know the rules of the road, I should have passed first time, corrupt quoter filling thieves thats what the DSA are.

Brendan Hughes

OllyK - Dick Grimes, traffic plod instructor of ex-SIDC, disagreed. In his view you could (and he did) happily pass a car in lane 3 if you were in lane 1. However, he didn't like it if the car was in lane 2, then you had to hang back.

The thing I find vague is the "if traffic is moving slower" comment. It suggests jams, but for me, if there's a lane hog at 65 and I'm doing 70, then I feel justified to pass as the traffic is moving slower. Perhaps "traffic" has to be interpreted as a certain minimum number of vehicles.

wrxmania

The highway code is a bit vague but certainly suggests to me undertaking when the other lane/person is moving at 40MPH on a motorway for instance or when there is congestion or an accident etc.

Sure there are other valid suggestions. It gives a small amount of advice in the IAM Advanced Driving book.

LG John

I undertake without a second thought these days if people are blissfully unaware they are crusing in the outside lane. Just the other day I set the cruise-control to 79mph (indicated) which I feel is by no means excissive (this was a 20mph limit btw ) and I drove in the left lane. I approached a car that was doing about 65mph in the right hand lane and noticed that he was about 2 bus lengths behind another car which was 2 bus lengths behind another car all in the outside lane. In total the three of them covered about 100m of the right lane and the nearest vehicle I could see in the left lane was about 300m in the distance I didn't adjust the cruise, I didn't adjust my relaxed position from the armrests and I didn't adjust my line or even batter much of an eyelid to the fact they were there! I drove (undertook) all three of them and when within 20m of the car in the left lane I checked my mirrors, indicated, moved out, overtook, mirrors, indicated, moved back in - continued @ 79mph. They probably went home to compain about the nutter 406 that undertook them but frankly I don't see the problem with my driving. In fact, I pretty much ignored the fact they were even there and the probably didn't even notice me anyway

Peanuts

iTrader: (15)

also, looking into your mirrors before returning into the left lane is dangerous due to blind spots.
You really ought to look briefly over your left shoulder as well to check for vehicles/riders in the blind spot.
been done to death on other threads I know, but being a biker as well it infuriates me to see people cutting between lanes without so much as a thought for other potentially more vulnerable users.

Andy

^Qwerty^

I didn't believe there was a specific offence for undertaking anymore?

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Over the last two months, I've had NO END of problems with this. Towing a trailer on the motorway, at a nice 60, up I come behind Mrs Bagg and her mate Mrs Slagg, doing 50 in the centre lane.(Mrs Bagg, and Mrs Slagg are usually over 60!)

Now, do I:
1. overtake her on the right, thereby breaking the law by driving a vehicle towing a trailer in the outside lane, or
2. undertake her, thereby breaking the law on undertaking?

And I have to note, insurance companies/crap statistics notwithstanding: every time this has happened, it's been a woman driver, and they just REFUSE to move over.
Eventually, I have broken the law, and looking back in wing mirrors, can see them STILL sat in the middle lane, when I'm a mile or so further on!

Drivers like that need compulsarily killing, before they cause someone else's death!

Alcazar

chaos.

Very dangerous. So when travelling at a ton+, how far are you going to travel looking over your shoulder to see if theres any stupid bikes coming up on your lefty at break neck speed? Bikes are death traps, no respect if they ride like they do.

LG John

My favourite one is when you pull up behind someone that is in the outside lane with no cars in front or behind them (notwithstanding me of course) for hundreds of metres. They FINALLY move over and then I pass pulling back into the left and I look in my rear view to see them pull back out to the outside lane Is the outside lane more comfortable to drive in or something

Spoon

As per Saxo Boy now as enough is enough.

When it might take you over 3 hours to get from Essex to Warwickshire if you join the masses it's time to undertake.

There's nothing big or clever about it, merely a necessity to keep your marbles and enjoy your vehicle.

Would you listen to anyone with a name like that!!

ajm

Are there any convincing arguments left against going for the American "free-for-all" system? We are heading that way anyway!

I go up the M5 for one junction daily, there and back over the Avonmouth Bridge where it is 4 lanes and it is like wacky races. The traffic is randomly spread across all 4 lanes and the only way to make any progress is to weave through it all. The muppets trundling along in the wrong lanes seem oblivious to whats going on around them but progress can be made if you keep your wits about you!

Maybe by throwing it wide open people who bimble along will soon realise that they have to use lane one if they ever wish to get off the motorway and we might get back towards the concept of overtaking only on the right!

OllyK

I think as has been said before there is a degree of interpretation here. Due to his qualifications he is making a judgement call that he belives his actions to be safe. However, if another officer decided to take umbridge at his action and pulled him, then in the eyes of the law I have little doubt he would be found guilty.

I did my IAM instruction with a Police instructor and he made a point about Stop signs. You are supposed to apply you hand brake at one of these, most people come to a halt on the foot brake and then pull away if clear to do so. If you had a pedantic copper he could do you, but as my instructor said "he'd be a **** to do it".

This goes on to the Copper vs Speed Camera argument again. Policemen can use their judgement to take a whole load of differing factors in to account and make a judement call based on the sitution, cameras can't

OllyK

My biggest argument would be that motorways are boring enough as it is. Ensuring you are in the correct lane and moving between lanes keeps the brain a little more alert. Sitting in the outside lane for 100 miles would tend to people having reduced concentration and the possibility of more accidents. The less involved you are in the driving experience the worse your driving IMO.

Mice_Elf

I've noticed a propensity for people to sit in Lane 3 as well. It's aggravating. Doesn't tend to happen in the Zed, remarkably enough. I'll pull up behind someone and they almost always instantly move over into the clear Lane 2.

In the MG it's another matter. I sat behind 2 blokes in a Merc (and it seems to be invariably Mercs these days, as opposed to BMWs) and they were oblivious to the road around them. Finally, after a couple of flashes, I undertook them and moved into Lane 1, which was also blisfully clear. They, however, remained in Lane 3. WHY???

OllyK

Most German cars have been fitted with left gain inhibitors making them very difficult to drive on the left of the road (hence why they are often right over to the white line on single carriage roads). The fogs are automatically switched on when the inhibitor has been activated to let people know it is active. Furthermore it is a well known fact that the magnetic resonance from the armco in the central reservation increases fuel economy on average by 12% and allows you to get a better reception on your hand held mobile phone.

Or it could just be that they are ignorant mother f*ckers

BexTait

PMSL at Olly

fast bloke

erm - not necessarily - if your lane is moving faster than another lane it is OK to pass in the lane you are in. This is aimed at slow moving traffic, but I have argued it sucessfully with plod standing at the side of the motorway after I passed him while he was in lane 2, I was in lane 1.

I told him that as he was not passing anything, but was travelling in lane 2 that I assumed he was preparing to turn right somewhere down the road, and that as the lane I was in was travelling faster I was quite entitled to maintain the speed within the limit to keep up with the traffic flow. He pointed out that you can't turn right on a motorway and that there were no other cars on the road. I pointed out that my logic would sound better in court than his.
He let me off

loony toon

iTrader: (4)

I have to admit i undertake on a regular basis but only when it is safe to do so . Most of the time this is because of some twit in the fast lane doing 80mph when he could be in the centre lane doing the same. I understand why people travel in the centre lane if the near side lane is enpty because they have the ruts caused by the lorry's and you bounce all over the place which is not nice.

If more people took notice of others on the road life would be much safer as well as being less stressful

Just a thought about other road users would be nice and thats coming from a "White Van Man"


Tony

jaf01uk

Chaos, you seem to be contradicting yourself again.

"You should use your mirrors to check the traffic around you at all times moving between lanes so it shouldn't matter if to pass on the right or left??"

And then you say that bikers shouldn't be allowed to overtake on the left [quote] "Very dangerous. So when travelling at a ton+, how far are you going to travel looking over your shoulder to see if theres any stupid bikes coming up on your lefty at break neck speed? Bikes are death traps, no respect if they ride like they do"

Seems a bit strange to put the point forward and then say it's OK for some and not others, the point of looking over your left shoulder prior to moving left is exactly the reason they dont allow undertaking, cos people like you wont do it! The American lane discipline is amazing and they dont do the usual British rep thing of one flash of the indicator as the car is half way into lane, an indicator is a signal of intention not an afterthought! Undertaking is only dangerous because the person who is hogging the right lane is usually doing it because they are not concentrating and therefor more likely to move left without checking and banging into the one undertaking.
The point of slower moving vehicles in the right lane as per Highway Code applies specifically to "slow moving queues of traffic"
And whoever said that the handbrake had to be applied at stop lines is pulling yer chain, as long as your wheels are stopped you can then proceed,
Gary

fast bloke

Jaf - define slow moving and queue

Slow moving - less than the speed limit

Queue - 1 car -(If you say a sign that says queue here do you need someone else to stand behind you before it is a queue?)

jaf01uk

I understand what your saying but I didnt write the book, I understand it to mean queues at roadworks and lead up to roundabouts and the like as opposed to national speed limit on a motorway, no doubt some of the pedantists (if thats a word) will link the dictionary meaning of a queue

JockyTT

Qwerty made a point that was perfectly valid but it escaped attention.

Undertaking itself is not illegal. It was removed from the statute books some 15 odd years ago. There is no law against it and you will never be prosecuted for 'undertaking'.

People refer to the Highway Code. Again, contravening the Highway Code is not in itself illegal, unless you contravene a regulation marked as 'MUST NOT'. In these cases there are usually references to the appropriate law or statute and in the current Highway Code these are marked in red.

However (and there is always a 'however') the Highway Code suggests best practice. If you pass on the left and there is an incident, reference will be made to the Higway Code and usually the person passing on the left will be held liable. This would be covered by 'driving without due care and attention' or 'dangerous driving' depending on circumstances.

Leslie

Chaos,

If you can't work out why overtaking on the left hand side is dangerous, when it is not normal to do in this country,unless the car ahead is signalling a right turn, then I should give up on the driving test straightaway!

Les