"Hogging the middle lane"

RichardD1970

Iceweasel wrote: »

If the UK Government says that Middle Lane Hogging comes under the heading of Careless Driving why are we disagreeing with it and trying to find a different crime to accuse the hogger of?

Because this is the motoring forum and everyone's opinion is the right one

prowla

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

There have been some useful posts on here that explain why middle lane usage can be annoying. The reason I tend to stay in the middle lane is because of when people join the motorway from the left they are often (or I find them often) distracting or intimidating. They are sometimes going at speeds faster than I am, even when I am driving at the speed limit.


Caravans or towing cars should not really be affected by me if I am already doing the speed limit because they will be breaking the law if they drive over 70 miles an hour.

Erm, but junctions are only every few miles, so you wouldn't stay in the middle lane for the entire journey on the basis there's going to be a slip road feeding in in 20 miles.

Aretnap

Iceweasel wrote: »

As far as I can tell the offence is 'Careless Driving' - because the Government says so.

Here is the Press Release from gov.uk -

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-penalties-to-tackle-tailgating-and-middle-lane-hogging

If the UK Government says that Middle Lane Hogging comes under the heading of Careless Driving why are we disagreeing with it and trying to find a different crime to accuse the hogger of?

Government press releases aren't the law. The offence created by section 3 of the Road Traffic Act and which became a fixed penalty offence is actually "Careless, or Inconsiderate Driving" and there are two different ways to commit it - driving without due care and attention, or by driving without reasonable consideration for other road users. Middle lane hogging is more likely to fall into the latter category.

It might suit the DfT's press office to bundle the two flavours of the offence under a single label of "careless driving" but that's an oversimplification of the law (it's written for journalists, not lawyers, after all). The CPS guidance (which actually is written for lawyers) treats it as inconsiderate driving rather than careless driving.

Disabled_Rights_For_Me

As I have said, the reason I use the middle lane is simply because of drivers on the left. There was one on the forum who explained quite nicely why my driving on the middle lane could bother other motorists and it is for this reason that I have made an agreement with him that I will try to drive more on the left.


It still doesn't answer though, if I am driving at 70mph (miles per hour) in the middle lane, anyone taking over me is either a criminal or an emergency vehicle.

I do have my own policy mantra that "Always for emergency vehicles move over, it might be someone who'se been run over". That helps me a lot and I always move over.

judderman62

force_ten wrote: »

I think we should go american where passing either side is fair game, it would stop a lot of people getting stressed out about numpties being in the wrong lane

yep that'd get my vote

Car_54

Aretnap wrote: »

Government press releases aren't the law. The offence created by section 3 of the Road Traffic Act and which became a fixed penalty offence is actually "Careless, or Inconsiderate Driving" and there are two different ways to commit it - driving without due care and attention, or by driving without reasonable consideration for other road users. Middle lane hogging is more likely to fall into the latter category.

It might suit the DfT's press office to bundle the two flavours of the offence under a single label of "careless driving" but that's an oversimplification of the law (it's written for journalists, not lawyers, after all). The CPS guidance (which actually is written for lawyers) treats it as inconsiderate driving rather than careless driving.

The Act also says "A person is to be regarded as driving without reasonable consideration for other persons only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving."

So the idiots who drive in lane 2 on an empty motorway aren't guilty of inconsiderate driving.

Despite the CPS guidance, I'd suggest they should be charged with careless driving, i.e. a standard "below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver."

force_ten

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

It still doesn't answer though, if I am driving at 70mph (miles per hour) in the middle lane, anyone taking over me is either a criminal or an emergency vehicle.

you are correct they are a breaking the law just as you are for hogging the middle lane

The changes will give the police powers to issue fixed penalty notices for careless driving, giving them greater flexibility in dealing with less serious careless driving offences - such as tailgating or middle lane hogging - and freeing them from resource-intensive court processes. The fixed penalty will also enable the police to offer educational training as an alternative to endorsement. Drivers will still be able to appeal any decision in court.

you careless driver you :rotfl::rotfl:

Iceweasel

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

It still doesn't answer though, if I am driving at 70mph (miles per hour) in the middle lane, anyone taking over me is either a criminal or an emergency vehicle.

Or it could be Mr D Beckham escaping form a dangerous photographer again.

Emergency vehicle drivers exceeding the speed limit can sometimes be considered/judged/prosecuted as criminals too.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2940180.stm

But it seems the OP has some perhaps God-given 'mantra' that allows him/her to make moral judgements for others whilst excusing his/her own behaviour.

antrobus

Aretnap wrote: »

Government press releases aren't the law. The offence created by section 3 of the Road Traffic Act and which became a fixed penalty offence is actually "Careless, or Inconsiderate Driving" and there are two different ways to commit it - driving without due care and attention, or by driving without reasonable consideration for other road users. Middle lane hogging is more likely to fall into the latter category.....

On a point of order.

The offence actually created by s3 RTA 1988 is;

If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/3

'Careless driving' is simply the label that people often chose to use to describe the offence of driving "without due care and attention", whilst 'inconsiderate driving' is used to to describe the offence of driving "without reasonable consideration". The labels are merely labels; there is no actual offence of either careless or inconsiderate driving.

Aretnap wrote: »

...It might suit the DfT's press office to bundle the two flavours of the offence under a single label of "careless driving" but that's an oversimplification of the law (it's written for journalists, not lawyers, after all). The CPS guidance (which actually is written for lawyers) treats it as inconsiderate driving rather than careless driving.

Since "careless driving" isn't defined by statute, I suppose they can if they want to, no matter how much it confuses joe public. But yes, 'hogging the middle lane' or "unnecessarily remaining in an overtaking lane" as the CPS put it, is specifically cited as an example of the offence of driving without reasonable consideration.

Aretnap

antrobus wrote: »

'Careless driving' is simply the label that people often chose to use to describe the offence of driving "without due care and attention", whilst 'inconsiderate driving' is used to to describe the offence of driving "without reasonable consideration". The labels are merely labels; there is no actual offence of either careless or inconsiderate driving.

It's the label applied by the Road Traffic Act itself - see the title of Section 3.