Which is more illegal? Lane Hogging? Or undertaking somebody lane hogging?

glentoran99

GTE_Boy wrote: »

And what if they flash from some distance away, will you still sit in the outside lane?

Why would they be flashing from some distance away? There is no need to flash you lights anyone

Car_54

takman wrote: »

Lane Hogging has come under the offence of "Driving Without Due Care and Attention" since 2013.

No it hasn't. The only change in the law in 2013 was to allow fixed penalties to be offered for Careless Driving. Careless Driving was defined in the Road Traffic Act 1988, and has not changed.

"Lane Hogging" was one of the examples of CD mentioned by the DfT at the time, but ill-informed reports in the media took this to mean it was now an offence.

There was nothing to stop the police charging a "lane hogger" with CD before 2013, but it would have to have gone to court.

glentoran99

George_Michael wrote: »

And being pig headed and refusing to pull over and let another car pass is IMO, just as bad.

No argument here

GTE_Boy

glentoran99 wrote: »

Why would they be flashing from some distance away? There is no need to flash you lights anyone

I'll leave you in your blissful ignorance.

Daz2009

The highway code states
Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

GTE_Boy

Car_54 wrote: »

No it hasn't. The only change in the law in 2013 was to allow fixed penalties to be offered for Careless Driving. Careless Driving was defined in the Road Traffic Act 1988, and has not changed.

"Lane Hogging" was one of the examples of CD mentioned by the DfT at the time, but ill-informed reports in the media took this to mean it was now an offence.

There was nothing to stop the police charging a "lane hogger" with CD before 2013, but it would have to have gone to court.

It's not changed since the 1930 Act.

Car_54

GTE_Boy wrote: »

It's not changed since the 1930 Act.

AFAIK the 1930 act simply referred to driving without due care and attention. The 1988 one defined that as meaning a standard below that of a careful and competent driver.

GTE_Boy

Car_54 wrote: »

AFAIK the 1930 act simply referred to driving without due care and attention. The 1988 one defined that as meaning a standard below that of a careful and competent driver.

Did it? I'll take your word for it, I thought that was without due care too.

societys_child

I have a feeling the op referring to lane hogging is lack of understanding.
There are a number of instances (in the area he lives) that lane 1 is only for vehicles wishing to exit at the next junction. These "slip roads" can can extend for some distance have been introduced to increase capacity.

The other lanes are obviously for vehicles wishing to continue on the m/way, this can lead, at times, to slower moving traffic in lane 2 whilst lane 1 is clear.

Got a feeling he's talking about the M62.

dktreesea

I like my way of driving, including on the motorway. The ones in front of me, get lost. (No problems there; most drivers seem to drive faster than the speed limit). Those behind me, either overtake or back off. It works out well. Most of the time I have plenty of empty road, behind me and in front of me.


Plus I've seen some advice somewhere about travelling on motorways that drivers should use all lanes, not just the left lane, especially if there are plenty of people coming onto the motorway. Maybe in busy traffic, if you're not looking to exit it would be better/safer to leave the left lane free for lorries and merging traffic, and use the second lane instead?