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

Joe_Horner

k3lvc wrote: »

Given that doing the wrong thing could easily cost you your [STRIKE]licence[/STRIKE] life I'd be concentrating on getting from A-B safely and smoothly

Fixed that for you Although that's probably beyond the imaginative power of the type who get annoyed by MLMs and pass them on the left (where many people don't expect to be passed).

The MLM has already shown their road awareness is poor just by being an MLM, so passing them where they don't expect it is, frankly, idiotic.

mchale

glentoran99 wrote: »

You drive up close behind someone flashing lights its attempted intimidation,


Not if there is cars on the left had side of me,

And sitting in lane 1 or 2 and not letting some one pass is the sign of a cr*p driver.

mchale

dktreesea wrote: »

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?

No it wouldn't, unlikely but say your driving in lane 2, your car cuts out no power you have to get across lane 1 to reach hard shoulder, If your driving correctly ie in lane 1 you can coast on to the hard shoulder without being a hazard to any one.

Mr.Generous

ok, so a stretch of busy motoerway I use has a long exit slip road, 3 lanes continue straight on, lane 1 is exit only. You get in this lane and a lorry is doing 50mph in lane 2 - effectively the inside lane for straight on. Can you undertake?

I do.

Lane hogs when inside lane(s) are empty I sometimes pull out and flash, but sometimes I would just undertake. Sorry, I'm not a saint. When I'm cruising along I stay as far left as I can.

GTE_Boy

Mr.Generous wrote: »

ok, so a stretch of busy motoerway I use has a long exit slip road, 3 lanes continue straight on, lane 1 is exit only. You get in this lane and a lorry is doing 50mph in lane 2 - effectively the inside lane for straight on. Can you undertake?

I do.

Lane hogs when inside lane(s) are empty I sometimes pull out and flash, but sometimes I would just undertake. Sorry, I'm not a saint. When I'm cruising along I stay as far left as I can.

Nothing wrong in that, the white lines are usually different.

Car_54

takman wrote: »

I have seen it widely reported that the first person to get fined for Middle Lane Hogging happened after 2013. I would assume that so many media outlets wouldn't report through story without doing some checking. But if you know a way to prove otherwise it would be quite interesting.

If it's been widely reported in the media, then of course it must be true....

Back in the real world, no-one has ever been fined for "Middle Lane Hogging" because there is no such offence. If you know otherwise, please let us know which law applies.

People have often been prosecuted for what the police describe as "driving like a c**t", but the official charge is usually Careless (or Inconsiderate) Driving under section 3 of the RTA 1988.

Biggles

Gloomendoom wrote: »

My mum was pulled over for middle lane hogging on the M4 long before 2013.

She was livid as there was hardly another car on the motorway.

Even less excuse for doing it, then.

NBLondon

Teapot55 wrote: »

One of the problems of moving into the middle lane to overtake is people in the left lane outpacing you & beginning to undertake you when you have finished your overtaking manouevre and are wanting to move back in to the left lane. You are then caught between those and the ones behind you who think *they* could have got in, and don't know why you haven't.

That sounds like the vehicles you have just finished overtaking are now accelerating to match your speed...
If that's the case - they're clearly anal sphincter exit points and you're better off letting them get ahead where you can keep an eye on them! Drop back and tuck in behind - then let whoever is following you have a go instead and watch the fun.
Since I've had a car with cruise control, I've realised that many drivers cannot/do not keep a constant speed even on a level road with consistent traffic levels - they drop down to 63 and then burst up to 73 a few minutes later. They can't all be hypermilers doing the pulse and glide thing can they?


On the main topic... I agree with many here. If I am in Lane 1 at a steady legal speed and overhaul a MLM in Lane 2 I will continue in my lane at the same speed to pass - but paying extra attention. I'm not going to make 4 lane changes - especially if there are illegally fast vehicles coming up behind in Lanes 2 or 3 (or 4).
If it's a case of HGV doing 56 in Lane 1 a mile ahead and car doing 62 in Lane 2 that's an overtake so I will come into Lane 2 or go around in 3 if safe. Passing them in Lane 1 then pulling out to overtake the HGV would be an "undertake" by my understanding.

takman

Car_54 wrote: »

If it's been widely reported in the media, then of course it must be true....

Back in the real world, no-one has ever been fined for "Middle Lane Hogging" because there is no such offence. If you know otherwise, please let us know which law applies.

People have often been prosecuted for what the police describe as "driving like a c**t", but the official charge is usually Careless (or Inconsiderate) Driving under section 3 of the RTA 1988.

Well now your just being pendantic. That's like saying nobody has even gotten in trouble by the police for "Hitting Someone Over The Head with a brick" because their is no offence under that name.

Yes the official charge is Careless Driving but there has to be a reason behind it. The police just can't go to court and say "he was driving carelessly". When the judge asks "what did they do exactly they can reply "he was driving carelessly your honour that is the offence under which you must prosecute him" without giving the details. The details are what matters and are what the judge will use to determine if they get prosecuted or not.

Also you can't just use the old "all media are liars" lies to prove your point without any evidence otherwise your just as bad as them.

So I'll ask again show me a prosecution before 2013 for Careless Driving where the person was prosecuted purely because they were in the incorrect Lane on a motorway when not overtaking. If you can do that then you earn the right to criticise the media reporting that the first time that happened was after 2013.

Car_54

takman wrote: »

Well now your just being pendantic. That's like saying nobody has even gotten in trouble by the police for "Hitting Someone Over The Head with a brick" because their is no offence under that name.

Yes the official charge is Careless Driving but there has to be a reason behind it. The police just can't go to court and say "he was driving carelessly". When the judge asks "what did they do exactly they can reply "he was driving carelessly your honour that is the offence under which you must prosecute him" without giving the details. The details are what matters and are what the judge will use to determine if they get prosecuted or not.

Also you can't just use the old "all media are liars" lies to prove your point without any evidence otherwise your just as bad as them.

So I'll ask again show me a prosecution before 2013 for Careless Driving where the person was prosecuted purely because they were in the incorrect Lane on a motorway when not overtaking. If you can do that then you earn the right to criticise the media reporting that the first time that happened was after 2013.

There must be dozens (or even hundreds) of cases of careless driving heard every day, but very few are reported in the media. That's not a criticism, they're just not news. If any official figures exist, they will simply show the number of CD cases, not the detail. So there are few "facts" to argue about.

My criticism of the media was over the reporting of the 2013 law change, which in most cases was muddled and sensationalised and centred on non-existent "new offences". Not helped by the DfT, who presented it as a major breakthrough, probably to justify the Minister's existence.