Motorway Driving Question

AdrianC

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

You know I wasn't actually directing that at you, right?

Umm, did it need to be, in order for it to be acceptable for me to reply to it?

BeenThroughItAll

AdrianC wrote: »

Umm, did it need to be, in order for it to be acceptable for me to reply to it?

No, I was simply pointing out that I agree with your point, whereas your post in response to mine appeared to come from a position wherein you thought I was in disagreement.

Whatever, I agree with you.

Out of bed the wrong side this morning? :beer:

Mercdriver

martinsurrey wrote: »

if the OP was in the correct lane, the other cars were in the right to pass on the left, you cant have it both ways, claim that the OP was in the right lane as it was a "slipway" (which it wasn't for a long time after the OP pulled out) and that the other cars were in the wrong for undertaking on the motorway.

either its a motorway and the OP was in the wrong lane, or it was a slipway and the other cars were fine undertaking.

and btw its the former, the slipway starts about 30 seconds after the OP pulled out.

(OP, if you are reading these, they are not directed at you, you seem to have taken the advice, its more to continue the discussion with others on a more theoretical point.)

Have a look on the pepipoo site and you will find that someone is in court for doing the manouevre you describe as legitimate. The driver went into the two lanes divided by the dotted line and then re-entered the road he had exited, in front of a police car. Police's judgement (and CPS backed the police) was that he was overtaking the police car and driving without due consideration.

AdrianC

He was close enough to the junction that the lanes were divided by the closer-marked hazard-approaching line? And he passed a marked police car on the left?

Honestly, some people bring it on themselves...

martinsurrey

Mercdriver wrote: »

Have a look on the pepipoo site and you will find that someone is in court for doing the manouevre you describe as legitimate. The driver went into the two lanes divided by the dotted line and then re-entered the road he had exited, in front of a police car. Police's judgement (and CPS backed the police) was that he was overtaking the police car and driving without due consideration.

if you're going to bring a court case into this, at least bring the facts with you, which are readily available from the site you mention.

from the case

" "I witnessed ******* make a sudden lane change without indication, undertake a slower moving vehicle, then change lane again causing the other vehicle to brake sharply to avoid a collision" "

it was the manner he did it NOT the manouevre in its self. The officer said he would give him a ticket for undertaking, but when it came to charge him, they didn't, because it wasn't an undertake, so they got him on the due consideration.

charged with driving without reasonable consideration because the officer claimed he made him break by pulling out in front of him.

"Driving without reasonable consideration
The offence of driving without reasonable consideration under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed only when other persons are inconvenienced by the manner of the defendants driving, see section 3ZA(4) RTA 1988. "

And if you read all 10 pages of the case, it looks like the officer deleted (or misplaced...) the video of the incident which places reliance on his statement, which contradicts the video the defendant has.

Mercdriver

AdrianC wrote: »

He was close enough to the junction that the lanes were divided by the closer-marked hazard-approaching line? And he passed a marked police car on the left?

Honestly, some people bring it on themselves...

unmarked X5. And no chevrons. Just the thicker lines that divide traffic approaching junctions as described here

Mercdriver

martinsurrey wrote: »

if you're going to bring a court case into this, at least bring the facts with you, which are readily available from the site you mention.

from the case

" "I witnessed ******* make a sudden lane change without indication, undertake a slower moving vehicle, then change lane again causing the other vehicle to brake sharply to avoid a collision" "

it was the manner he did it NOT the manouevre in its self. The officer said he would give him a ticket for undertaking, but when it came to charge him, they didn't, because it wasn't an undertake, so they got him on the due consideration.

charged with driving without reasonable consideration because the officer claimed he made him break by pulling out in front of him.

"Driving without reasonable consideration
The offence of driving without reasonable consideration under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed only when other persons are inconvenienced by the manner of the defendants driving, see section 3ZA(4) RTA 1988. "

And if you read all 10 pages of the case, it looks like the officer deleted (or misplaced...) the video of the incident which places reliance on his statement, which contradicts the video the defendant has.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no such specific offence as undertaking. It is always prosecuted under due consideration. Quite apart from what happens in this case (and I have read it all) I'm sure we would all like to avoid the hassles of FPN and court cases...

martinsurrey

Mercdriver wrote: »

To the best of my knowledge, there is no such specific offence as undertaking. It is always prosecuted under due consideration. Quite apart from what happens in this case (and I have read it all) I'm sure we would all like to avoid the hassles of FPN and court cases...

yes, and driving in the outside lane of a clear motorway at 50mph could get you pulled up under the same offence...

and I didn't say it was a valid manoeuvre, I said that if the OP was in the right, so where they, but I don't think the OP was.

almillar

So what distance does that start to apply?
If not 1/2 mile, then what about 1 mile? 2 miles? 5 miles?
I'd have said that the lanes started to officially split at the point at which the road markings changed. And that'll be a LOT nearer the actual split than the OP was.

I didn't state a distance in my post, but what I DID say was that if there's a sign saying 'to go to X get in lane y' then from then on, you can be in that lane. If I was offered the choice of people being in lane too early, or too late, I'd choose too early. We've firmly established already that speed was the problem. But yes, 800m is acceptable to me I think on a motorway.

That doesn't really add up does it?

I don't have any other information, than an inexperienced driver's estimation of the distance. Could it be wrong, absolutely. That does seem like a lot of passes in a short time, especially if they were all doing 70.

I see nothing wrong with doing 50mph on a motorway; 70mph is a maximum not a minimum or average expected of you.

I'd say that driving at 50 and 'forcing' lorries to take to the fast lane, holding up 70mph drivers, is driving without due consideration for other road users.

If a car travelling at 50mph is a hazard for approaching drivers, then a lorry at that speed will be just as much of a hazard.

It is, yes. In fact, considering the size of it, a lorry is more of a hazard than a car. So all these slow moving cars are ADDITIONAL hazards. We don't need any more hazards than there already are.

I see you chose not to answer my question about when a driver's choice to drive slower than their limit becomes inappropriate?

There's no number in black and white. 0mph or 70mph are all valid speeds on a motorway depending on conditions. If you want a number, I'll give you 60mph.

A "rolling roadblock" reducing the traffic speeds of ONE lane by SIX mph is hardly a big issue

Maybe not, but in my experience, that's not what happens - they'll all want to overtake, blocking another lane.

Please, everyone, acknowledge that motorways are explicitly designed to DRIVE FAST on!

unforeseen

A vehicle going slower than normal/expected is normally the cause of phantom traffic jams

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8600554.stm

There is plenty of other evidence, scientific and otherwise of this effect

So it may delay the front running drivers by a few seconds but after a short while you can end up with stationary traffic a mile or more back from the original point.

Haven't you ever been in a traffic jam on a motorway then got to a certain point and the road suddenly clears? That was probably caused by somebody suddenly slowing down and then speeding up again