motorway etiquette

[Softus]

Does this violate motorway rules?

Yes you are correct it does violate the rules

No it doesn't. You are obviously ignorant of the law in this area, or you are lying. If the latter then you are a troll.

 

[Moz]

Softus

were you not the ex copper ?

 

[Softus]

Hi Moz

I thought you were referring to Thermo?

 

[eggplant]

crafty, AFAIK there's no specific law that prohibits overtaking on the inside, and it's perfectly legal in any circumstances where it's safe. For example, it's deemed sufficiently safe when a car is preparing to turn right and traffic can past on its nearside

if I remember rightly, 3 times you can overtake on the inside:

One way street (no this doesnt include motorway or dual carriage way!)
Slow moving or stationary traffic (dont think theres an actual defination of "slow")
and when directed to by an authorative officer (ie police/traffic control)

TimWest wrote:
you should be banned from this forum for breaking etiquette!

Tim West should be banned for being a tw4t

 

[Moz]

well its my shock .... SHOCK horror ..........

 

[tim west]

crafty, AFAIK there's no specific law that prohibits overtaking on the inside, and it's perfectly legal in any circumstances where it's safe. For example, it's deemed sufficiently safe when a car is preparing to turn right and traffic can past on its nearside

if I remember rightly, 3 times you can overtake on the inside:

One way street (no this doesnt include motorway or dual carriage way!)
Slow moving or stationary traffic (dont think theres an actual defination of "slow")
and when directed to by an authorative officer (ie police/traffic control)

TimWest wrote:
you should be banned from this forum for breaking etiquette!

Tim West should be banned for being a tw4t

well thank you for your highly intellectual input looks like you were given a good education, not

 

[Softus]

well thank you for your highly intellectual input looks like you were given a good education, not

Appearance isn't everything Slogger.

 

[Big_Spark]

crafty, AFAIK there's no specific law that prohibits overtaking on the inside, and it's perfectly legal in any circumstances where it's safe. For example, it's deemed sufficiently safe when a car is preparing to turn right and traffic can past on its nearside.

Softus, from the Highway Code.

241: Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe to do so.
Overtake only on the right. You should

check your mirrors
take time to judge the speeds correctly
make sure that the lane you will be joining is sufficiently clear ahead and behind
take a quick sideways glance into the blind spot area to verify the position of a vehicle that may have disappeared from your view in the mirror
remember that traffic may be coming up behind you very quickly. Check your mirrors carefully. When it is safe to do so, signal in plenty of time, then move out
ensure you do not cut in on the vehicle you have overtaken
be especially careful at night and in poor visibility when it is harder to judge speed and distance.

242: 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.

243: You MUST NOT use the hard shoulder for overtaking.
Laws MT(E&W)R regs 5 & 9 & MT(S)R regs 4 & 8

I think the Police take a very DIM view of "undertaking" as it can cause people to visit the true UNDERTAKERS on a one time only basis...

 

[Softus]

crafty, AFAIK there's no specific law that prohibits overtaking on the inside, and it's perfectly legal in any circumstances where it's safe. For example, it's deemed sufficiently safe when a car is preparing to turn right and traffic can past on its nearside.

A bunch of stuff from the Highway Code that is not law.

I think the Police take a very DIM view of "undertaking" as it can cause people to visit the true UNDERTAKERS on a one time only basis...

Well, you thinking what the police think is two steps away from anything relevant or important.

 

[oilman]

.................

I think the Police take a very DIM view of "undertaking" as it can cause people to visit the true UNDERTAKERS on a one time only basis...

So they do, but in the OP's circumstance it would not be "undertaking". This is no difference from a traffic light junction with 3 lanes marked for the relevant direction. It's just larger and lacking the lights. If you were to hold up traffic by pacing the right hand lane you may get pulled over for being an obstruction or being a danger to other road users. Traffic congestion on motorways is the place where motorway crashes most often happen. Bloody obvious really

 

[ricicle]

When I first read this post last week I was watching Traffic Cops on TV and the copper pulled over and issued a fine to a woman for undertaking on a motorway (No it wasn't the hard shoulder either)The motorway was queued up and she wanted to get off at the approaching junction.

 

[Softus]

When I first read this post last week I was watching Traffic Cops on TV and the copper pulled over and issued a fine to a woman for undertaking on a motorway.

If she was driving unsafely then she might have been charged with driving without due care and attention, or do you know of legislation prohibiting overtaking on the nearside?

 

[ricicle]

As I wasn't watching the programme fully its hard to say how she was driving but from listening to what was going on it sounded like she was just done for undertaking.You would hope that the officer involved would know whether or not this was an offence in itself

 

[Softus]

She wasn't done for undertaking, because there is no law against doing so per se, only against driving unsafely.

If the traffic policeman said that there was a law against overtaking on the nearside, then he/she was wrong.

 

[ricicle]

That must have been it then.Did you watch the program in question,Softus and if so what was the full reason for the offence? (ie the unsafe part of the undertaking)
As I've said I was not fully watching.

Sorry just seen the bit on the bottom - you didn't see it did you.