cster

Can anybody explain to me why it is against the law to pass somebody using the left lane of a dual carriageway.
Surely if they use their mirrors before changing lanes it is not a problem, and if they don't, you will crash into them regardless of whether you pass on their left or their right.
Is it to do with history or something?

burning_diarohhea

for pure safety,
i know what u mean though and i agree

what winds me up is people in middle lane on motorway with nothing within miles, i undertake then just to make a point or get behind and flash............

i just wish more drivers used thier common sense

Simon 69

It isnt illegal. You cant be charged with 'undertaking'.

Elmer Fudpucker

Pretty sure that you can,possibly dangerous driving even?

Undertaking is only allowed if the inside lane is moving quicker than the outside.

chris1scouser

in england for sure you can go to jail for undertaking.

Snazy

And only possible this way too.

Sorry just having a PSL moment

Alan MaC

Pretty sure, the only legal way On A Motorway, you can do this is>>>

You are coming off at your junction, your on the inside lane, the traffic in the middle and outside lanes can be undertaken in only these circumstances.

I will have a look for the Highway code on this.

Regards



Alan MaC

DEEDEE

I remember reading a post on 5ive-o, as a HGV driver I come across this problem everyday. I think the answer was it is wrong to undertake and to move back to your original lane to gain places or further your position in traffic congestion. This is viewed as dangerous driving

silent running

I would be very surprised if 'undertaking' would be an allowable manouevre under any circumstances. We all do it to middle and fast lane hogs if they really are oblivious to the traffic around them but let's be honest, whenever you do undertake, you KNOW it's not the right way to do things. There is no specific offence of 'undertaking' but that wouldn't stand in the way of a traffic cop who had you on video (undertaking the silly cow weaving all over the fast lane in her husband's Range Rover Sport while checking her hair in the mirror and yakking on the phone) saying you were driving without due care and attention which is a do-able offence.

In the case of pulling out onto a DC or motorway from a slip road, you either get well in front of the car alongside you and match speed or go faster before you leave the slip road, or you slow down and tuck in behind. Undertaking so you can pull off at a slip road while lane 2/3 are going slower does not count. Again, everyone does it, but it doesn't mean it would stand up in court. The CPS would just say that if you should have matched speed with the rest of the traffic and if you were going faster you should have overaken first then pulled in. Regardless of circumstances, there is always a slower, more boring option than undertaking.

Doesn't mean I agree with it - I just know from bitter experience with traffic cops and magistrates court, that what you or I think makes road sense isn't the same as what the authorities do. The 'expertise' of a traffic copper with a couple of years sitting in laybys and hiding out at roundabouts is worth more than ANY member of the public's, regardless of whether they've done half a million miles and 15 years driving without incident. Just get used to it.

petedotuk

It is illegal to undertake as the inside lane is the traveling lane and the outside is the overtaking/fast lane, However you are allowed to "undertake" if the person in the overtaking/fast lane is going slower than the speed limit.

The police consider sitting in the overtaking/fast lane under the speed limit just as serious as undertaking as this causes people to undertake.

Snazy

Lets be PC about this now.... Fast lane aka Lane 3

Sorry, just in one of those moods tonight.
Works fine in the USA, but then again 99% out there have more lane dicipline

Simon 69

I will say it again: you can not be charged with 'undertaking', no matter what people think.

johnnyroper

agreed

if some **** is doing 60 in middle lane you are allowed to undertake at 70mph if on motorway.
a few months back avon and somerset police had a purge on pulling over lane hoggers who forced people to undertake as well as other driving offences that normally get overlooked,quite rightly so in my opinion

Ciaran

iTrader: (16)

i sometimes do it when your on a duler in the outside lane behind a car which is overtaking a lorry 1MPH faster than the lorry and then after they have finally passed it they see another lorry 1mile away so they stay in the outside lane when it is going to take them 2 minutes to even get to the lorry. I then usually pull in and very slowly sneak up the inside

Simon 69

I wont take your money. 'Undertaking' (more accurately described as: 'overtaking on the near side') itself is not against the law. Where you are seen to do so however, a Police officer may charge you with careless or dangerous driving and use your actions to support the charge.

Steve_PPP

iTrader: (3)

undertaking wouldn't be necessary if the people moved back into the left lane when they weren't overtaking! they do my head in!

did a few thousands miles on American interstates a couple of years ago - undertaking works fine over there. But generally, there freeways are less crowded than our motorways.

chris1scouser

you can be done for careless driving because you undertook though.

chris1scouser

i'm waiting at this moment for the summons to be delivered for careless driving because i undertook. i'll keep you all informed on the status of this charge. worth being mindful of undertaking though. just hope i don't get nine points out of it.

Simon 69

You can, but theyd have to prove that you were driving carelessly. The act alone is not an offence. If you google this youll be able to find a House of Lords debate, between Lord Davies of Oldham and Lord Elton, about this very matter. The misconception is widely held, but the fact is that the act of overtaking on the near side is not against the law.

chris1scouser

thanks simon i'll put that to the lawyer.

DaveD

iTrader: (2)

The point is that you're not supposed to move into a nearside lane to specifically overtake someone who is to your right.

I think this can be seen as careless driving - the Highway Code states you should always overtake on the right - therefore deliberately moving to the left to overtake is not complying with the Code, regardless of how fast / slow the other car is going.

myblackwrx

iTrader: (1)

In May 2002, when this website hadn't even entered the realms of consciousness, I decided to write an email to the Department of Transport, and my best friend, Dave Scott, decided to do the same.

Now, we both guessed at departments, because there isn't one entitled 'Division For Motorway Muppetry', and sent our emails on their merry way. Lo and behold, I never heard back from mine. It probably hit the trash icon on a bureaucrat's computer screen or got misdirected to the Ministry of Fishfingers or something.

Anyway, Dave did get a reply. And a courteous, thoughtful reply at that. It was sent by a certain 'John Doyle' from 'Road Safety Division 3'. He said:


Dear Mr Scott

Thank you for your e-mail of 28 May 2002 about lane discipline on our motorways. I have been asked to reply.

The Government sympathise with your concern about the standard of driving on our motorways. "Lane hogging" can be very irritating to other drivers, it reduces road capacity, particularly at high flow levels and it is potentially dangerous. However lane hogging is not a specific offence, although it is safe driving practice for vehicles using motorways to remain in the left hand lane unless overtaking as advised in the Highway Code. Failure to comply with the advice in the Highway Code does not in itself constitute an offence (nor would it necessarily be crucial to the outcome of any civil case which might come before the courts). However, anyone involved on such a case would be entitled to point to a failure to heed the Highway Code's advice. It would then be for the court to reach its decision in the light of all the evidence presented to it. Nevertheless The Road Traffic Act 1991 has given police the powers to prosecute people for the offences of dangerous and careless and inconsiderate driving.

Overtaking on the left is not an offence in the United Kingdom. However, all drivers are bound by our road traffic laws, and liable to prosecution for offences such as careless or dangerous driving. Enforcement of the law is, of course, a matter for the police who will make their decisions on whether to prosecute in the circumstances of each individual case.

My Department will continue to press home the message about good motorway lane discipline through publicity such as our leaflet "A Guide to Safer Motorway Driving". Additionally, signs reading "Keep Left Except When Overtaking" have been erected on some motorways and lane discipline has also been included in police motorway safety campaigns.

Yours sincerely

JOHN DOYLE


Now this basically says that being a middle lane moron is fundamentally LEGAL, but he does concede that the Road Traffic Act 1991 can be used to prosecute 'inconsiderate driving', so there is some hope there. Mr Doyle also states that UNDERTAKING IS LEGAL. Good news. Although he does point out that the Plod will look dimly on undertaking as it is potentially a careless or dangerous act. Hardly carte blanche to do what you want, then.

As for his leaflet 'A Guide to Safer Motorway Driving', this is something I have yet to see. Why not send it out with a road tax reminder, so I can't miss it? He also mentions signage, but I have only ever seen one 'Keep Left Unless Overtaking' sign on UK motorways, and this means there obviously need to be more.

So, it is still worth pressing for more signage, more education and clarification about undertaking? If it is written into the statutes that drivers can overtake on the right OR LEFT on multi-carriageway roads , then it is less likely to be seen as an unconventional 'dangerous or careless' act by the police.

taken from Middle Lane Morons - The Offical Website "Dedicated to freeing Lane 2 from the League of Chimpions" Middle Lane Morons

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

As long as you stay in your lane, I'm not sure the police can/would have an issue with it? Although I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of passing a car on the left, simply because most 'drivers' struggle with the idea of using their right hand mirror, let alone their left hand one.

As for the comment regarding lane discipline in the US - there is a big difference in that there isn't such a great difference in lane speeds in the US as there is in the UK. An inside lane of a UK motorway is typically going at 55-60mph, where the 'outside' lane can be steadily moving along at 80 - 90mph, with the middle lane somewhere near the official speed limit. US highways, generally have all lanes traveling at roughly the same speed.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

I almost always pass the middle lane hoggers on the inside lane ... if nothing else than to teach them to MOVE OVER.

TX.

mightyyid

Fully agree - but how many do - few in my experience.

The key thing for me has always been whether the act of undertaking was there to pass a car or because you were in the lane itself. A few scenarios:

1 - Empty motorway - you are on inside lane and muppet is in middle. You pass at any speed on inside lane. This is not undertaking for me as I was in the correct lane and the fault was with the person in the middle lane who was in contravention of the Highway Code.

2 - Busy motorway - lots of traffic in middle and outside lanes, little on inside lane. You pull over and accelerate into inside lane and thus go past cars. This is far closer to undertaking as the act was meant to pass cars on the inside. I do this - more because I hate middle and outside lane hoggers, but this is where I feel I would have a harder time justifying my actions to the police

I'm also of the opinion that if a police car were following me, in scenario 1, I would be far less dangerous by passing on the inside than pulling out into the outside lane and then pulling back in to the inside lane. More risks etc. Had the person in the middle lane been in the inside lane, everything would have been safe and thus one action has led to another. It is the first action that should be penalised, not the second. I am one car - if another ten cars do the same, 11 cars have had to take action caused by one individual. Simple in my book...

I will always stay in the inside lane yet drive at a decent speed - or if the motorway is busy then it does not really work. I just wish people who sit int he middle lane were at a dinner party and I'd bring up the conversation and wait for them to moan about traffic congestion. Then I'd slap them - hard, and advise them of the fact that traffic congestion can be caused by a muppet making a three lane road into a two lane road because they are f*wits!

Andy

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

Not thought about it that way but very true - because your moving into a slower lane, rather than pulling out into a faster one.

But I'm in total agreement with what your saying - if its empty and muppet is in the middle lane, I'm not going to swerve around them if I'm in the inside lane.

serega

Laws are there to control the society as best as possible. It makes human behavoiur much more predictable and you yourself know what to expect from other people which makes your lives easier. To be fair not all laws make sense to everyone, not all laws are there because of common sense, it was thought that way and it should be upheld this way untill it is decided otherwise. It is illegal to break any law, no matter how minor so yes - you can be done for it.

But just think what would it be like if everyone could overtake on any side ? It would make your driving just that much more uncomfortable because you'd have to pay twice as much attention - some people just have too slow reaction times to pay much more attention ( like people in their 80's who still drive ), so no doubt the accident rate would increase dramatically if it was the case . It is a common concept that our society tries to make lives of people within it easier, and since it makes it easier and more predictable if people overtake on one side, its there.

But in turn i'd say this protectionism turns people into mindless baffoons, slow their reaction times, slows their brain functioning and we become slaves to the system - which is not really bad for people who try to control us you have to admit.

Bubba po

One of the most bizarre behaviours I've seen, and on more than one occasion, is when you are travelling in the left-hand lane at - say - just under the speed limit and slowly gaining on a middle-lane muppet. When you get to the point where you are level with them they suddenly speed up to stay in front! Perhaps in their warped minds they're going "Oh dear - that gentleman to my left is about to commit a traffic offence by undertaking me; I must prevent him from doing so."

richs2891

I dont have a problem with so called "undertaking" , do agree if your on a quite motorway and your in lane one and go past some idiot in lane 2 that is just sat there.
Most of the middle lane morans are that brain in neutral while driving it does not really matter which lane you go past them ! (if they where paying correct attention they would be using the corrent lane IMHO)
If and when I do undertake I tend to use the horn - just after I've gone past so they dont panic and swere into me - or If I dont think its safe to undertake - overtake with full beam on !
I feel the police should spend more time pulling these people and morte of the use correct lane displayed on the motorway signs.
Richard

ritchie21

An interesting debate that has finally got me to post (usually a reader trying to gain more knowledge about my soon to be new Scooby than somebody who can post with knowledge on the subject of Subaru's) on something I can actually contribute to!

As a previous poster has said there is no offence of undertaking with which you can be charged in England and Wales (don't know about Scotland as the legal system there is different to that in England and Wales). The two offences that you could be charged with are:

1. Careless/Inconsiderate Driving - where your driving standard falls below that of a reasonable, competent and prudent driver.

2. Dangerous Driving - where your driving falls FAR below that of a reasonable, competent and prudent driver.

In terms of both scenarios discussed (lane hogging and undertaking) you could potentially be charged with either of the above offences, depending of course entirely upon the circumstances in which the manouvere is made. For example, if you have somebody who is sat in either the middle or the outside lane doing 50pmh, causing other drivers to have to undertake then that is potentially dangerous driving - say if the motorways are busy and that driver also causes others to have to brake sharply and perhaps swerve to avoid a collision.

If you simply have somebody who likes to tailgate, is fed up when drivers who are driving at the speed limit and are in the middle or outside lane for a correct reason (overtaking as they are actually deemed to be overtaking lanes) and decides to undertake to 'get in front' then they are potentially a dangerous driver. This is because the Police and the Courts will always look at the potential consequences that could stem from your driving ie if it could have caused an accident.

Generally the Police will exercise common sense and if they don't then the CPS have to decide a) Whether it is in the public interest to continue with the Prosecution and b) Whether there is a reasonable prospect of conviction. If a prosecution continues then you are left with either the magistrates (in a case of careless/inconsiderate driving) or a jury having to apply the definitions above and decide whether an offence was committed.

I have defended an elderly gentleman who was travelling in the middle lane of a motorway, moved to the nearside lane to exit at a junction and in the process of doing so 'cut up' a motorcyclist and very nearly caused a collision. Although he was charged with dangerous driving, the Crown Court Judge expressed the view that it was more of a case of careless driving, accepting that the motorcyclist was in the 'blindspot' of the drivers mirror, but expressing the view that a reasonable, competent and prudent driver would have also looked over his shoulder to check for anything in that blindspot. Now I'm not sure that a jury would have agreed - how many people actually look over their shoulders when doing that??? But he was a man of good character who had never been in Court before and didn't want to run the risk of being convicted of dangerous driving (which is what the CPS would have taken to trial) and going to prison. Instead he was fined and received 5 penalty points. It's all a question of degree and it all depends entirely on the personal driving experiences (as a driver or passenger) of those who are to try you - unless of cause the driving is so obviously dangerous or careless.

I am, by the way, a practicing Criminal Barrister and one of my specialities is Road Traffic Law and my father was for many years a road traffic Police Officer.

Sorry for butting in but it was at last something I could actually contribute to!!