GMTV and the Highway Code
Discussion
A 'ggod friend' of mine the other day entered a competition on GMTV, to win a Mazda MX5 (don't ask). The question was (and I quote) what do double white lines in the middle of the road mean. The answers were:
a) no parking
b) no overtaking
c) no reversing.
My friend decidied to have a go, appreciating how clever GMTV were being. He answered a) no parking.
He realised that many would fall for the b) no overtaking, but realised that GMTV must know this wasn't correct, as they included the correct answer a) as an option. The rules in the highway code are quite clear (see rules 106 to 111, and rule 215).
GMTV then announced that the answer was.....b) no overtaking.
My 'good friend' contacted them, to explain the error. GMTV have refused to admit they are wrong, refused to re-draw the entries, called my friends comments ludicrous, and have refused to pass on any details of a customer services manager he can contact. They have insisted that the highway code states that you must not overtake where there are white lines, but you can park where there are white lines.
My friend has contacted ASA, Watchdog and OfCom. He would contact Mazda, but he can't find an e-mail for them (strange, but there you are).
As advanced drivers who know the law, what would piston headers on here do. Give it up as a lost cause or press on regardless. How would he go about contacting other entrants who have answered correctly, to form a pressure group.
Regards
Sally
a) no parking
b) no overtaking
c) no reversing.
My friend decidied to have a go, appreciating how clever GMTV were being. He answered a) no parking.
He realised that many would fall for the b) no overtaking, but realised that GMTV must know this wasn't correct, as they included the correct answer a) as an option. The rules in the highway code are quite clear (see rules 106 to 111, and rule 215).
GMTV then announced that the answer was.....b) no overtaking.
My 'good friend' contacted them, to explain the error. GMTV have refused to admit they are wrong, refused to re-draw the entries, called my friends comments ludicrous, and have refused to pass on any details of a customer services manager he can contact. They have insisted that the highway code states that you must not overtake where there are white lines, but you can park where there are white lines.
My friend has contacted ASA, Watchdog and OfCom. He would contact Mazda, but he can't find an e-mail for them (strange, but there you are).
As advanced drivers who know the law, what would piston headers on here do. Give it up as a lost cause or press on regardless. How would he go about contacting other entrants who have answered correctly, to form a pressure group.
Regards
Sally
HighwayCode said:
108: Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10mph or less.
Laws RTA sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26
www.highwaycode.gov.uk/10.htm
HighwayCode said:
215: You MUST NOT stop or park on
the carriageway or the hard shoulder of a motorway except in an emergency (see Rule 244)
a pedestrian crossing, including the area marked by the zig-zag lines (see Rule 167)
a Clearway (see Traffic signs section)
a Bus Stop Clearway within its hours of operation
taxi bays as indicated by upright signs and markings
-an Urban Clearway within its hours of operation, except to pick up or set down passengers (see Traffic signs section)
a road marked with double white lines, except to pick up or set down passengers
a bus, tram or cycle lane during its period of operation
a cycle track
red lines, in the case of specially designated 'red routes', unless otherwise indicated by signs.
Laws MT(E&W)R regs 7 & 9, MT(S)R regs 6 & 8, ZPPPCRGD regs 18 & 20, RTRA sects 5 & 8, TSRGD regs 10, 26, 27 & 29(1), RTA 1988 sects 36 & 21(1)
Ahah! Is *this* the argument your pal is using?
Double white lines have dual meaning in this case, I suppose. However - the white line in the middle of the road's primary meaning is that you must not cross it. Two lines indicate traffic travelling in both directions may not cross...i.e. No Overtaking in either direction.
Interesting that it also requires "no parking" - but this is secondary as it is to ensure that traffic that wishes to travel the road does not need to pass a stationary vehicle and cross the white line.
Your pal has a point, though. Although I expect "The Judges' decision is final." means they can do what they like...
Well spotted though!
jeremyc said:
The double solid white lines mean that vehicles travelling in either direction may not cross the lines (or straddle them).
They do not mean no overtaking: it is perfectly permissible to overtake providing that you do not cross the solid white line(s).
I believe this to be exactly right.
I will often make space for motorbikes to pass me when in traffic with double-whites so that they can legally overtake. They usually cross the double-whites anyway (doh!).
Of course if there is a slow moving road-maintenance vehicle displaying a blue keep right arrow to the rear, you can cross the double-whites to overtake it.
The right answer is no parking.
Of course if there is a slow moving road-maintenance vehicle displaying a blue keep right arrow to the rear, you can cross the double-whites to overtake it.
The right answer is no parking.
jeremyc said:
The double solid white lines mean that vehicles travelling in either direction may not cross the lines (or straddle them).
They do not mean no overtaking: it is perfectly permissible to overtake providing that you do not cross the solid white line(s).
Correct.
I'd have gone for a) too.
vonhosen said:
The double solid white lines mean that vehicles travelling in either direction may not cross the lines (or straddle them).
They do not mean no overtaking: it is perfectly permissible to overtake providing that you do not cross the solid white line(s).
Correct.
I'd have gone for a) too.
Interesting. I'd have gone for the (all too obvious) (b)...and probably still would! Because in practice not being able to cross the white line in the centre of the road means no ability to overtake. There are the exceptions to the rule... "to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10mph or less"...but...
I agree there is a valid argument that (a) is the correct answer though!
I suppose if you are a biker you would more commonly use this rule to pass very slow moving traffic - provided you don't cross the white line?
jeremyc said:
The double solid white lines mean that vehicles travelling in either direction may not cross the lines (or straddle them).
They do not mean no overtaking: it is perfectly permissible to overtake providing that you do not cross the solid white line(s).
or to pass (overtake)a road maintenance vehicle, pedal cycle or horse moving 10mph or less.
Take it as far as possible imo it could be worth an MX-5
too slow at finding relative passage and typing it!
>> Edited by KB_S1 on Wednesday 3rd May 16:59
You see, this is where the debate is. Yet the Highway code is quite clear.
There is nothing that says you cannot overtake. You must not CROSS the lines, but that wasn't one of the options.
However, rule 215 is very clear. You must not park.
Everyone's confusion is why my friend thought it was a good competition, and why he entered (knowing few if any would get it right). Yet GMTV insist that the Highway code says no overtaking, and it doesn't say no parking. Og the three options, a) is the only correct one (look at rules 106 to 111, and rule 215).
So absolutely terrible customer service. Rude, arrogant. offensive, dismissive, and an apparent disregard of the code. Seems a funny way to run a business to me.
There is nothing that says you cannot overtake. You must not CROSS the lines, but that wasn't one of the options.
However, rule 215 is very clear. You must not park.
Everyone's confusion is why my friend thought it was a good competition, and why he entered (knowing few if any would get it right). Yet GMTV insist that the Highway code says no overtaking, and it doesn't say no parking. Og the three options, a) is the only correct one (look at rules 106 to 111, and rule 215).
So absolutely terrible customer service. Rude, arrogant. offensive, dismissive, and an apparent disregard of the code. Seems a funny way to run a business to me.
You could try these guys. There good at getting on TV and always looking for an angle.
www.racfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=41
www.racfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=41
NathanK said:
You could try these guys. There good at getting on TV and always looking for an angle.
www.racfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=41
My 'Gentleman friend' contacted them as you recommended. He was slightly disapointed to receive comments back that stated that they (RACFoundation) believed GMTV to be correct.
My friend and I are more and more confused. I have duplicated the response from the foundation in full below, and our comments on it.
The RACFoundation said: I am always reluctant to contradict someone who is as sure of their facts as you seem to be, especially when I didn't see the original question. However, if you have accurately reproduced the question, I think you picked the wrong option, but read on, because it isn't simple.
Road markings [white lines] along the carriageway are dealt with on page 78 of my copy of the 1999 edition of the Highway Code. They include 'edge lines' which the question seems to specifically exclude, centre lines and hazard warning lines [Rule 106], double white lines [Rules 107/108], diagonal hatching [rule 109] and lane lines [rule 110]. Rule 108 does not mention parking, although Rule 215 does and includes double white lines among the list of places where you MUST NOT park..
Double white lines [Rule 107/108] are fully dealt with at Reg 26 Traffic Signs Regulations and General Direction 2002. Although primarily concerned with restrictions on overtaking, Reg 26 also prohibits stopping.....subject to a substantial list of exceptions including picking up or setting down passengers and loading and unloading. However the prohibition on stopping in Reg 26 is solely for the purposes of minimising the occasions in which it becomes necessary to pass a stationary vehicle and thus cross a solid white line.
On balance, I think GMTV's assertion is more closely aligned to the Highway Code, where Rule 108 relates only to overtaking. Whilst I recognise that yours derives some support from Rule 215 and Reg 26 TSRGD 2002, I nevertheless think that GMTV's assertion is more accurate. However the situation is not simple and if you decide to use my response in your dispute with GMTV, I must ask you to use it in full, rather than quoting selectively.
Head of Traffic and Road Safety
We replied: many thanks for your response.
My main concern is the statement that double white lines in the middle of the road mean no overtaking. While I appreciate that this may be the general understanding, I still maintain it is factually incorrect. That is why I invited GMTV to show where, in the Highway Code, it states that you must no overtake where there are double white lines. The Code clearly states that you must not cross the double white lines, but that is a different thing. There are many circumstances where you can overtake where there are double white lines.
However, the code specifically states (with a few exemptions) that you must not park where there are double white lines. Highway code, waiting and Parking, Rule 215, you must not stop or park where there are double white lines (except to pick up or drop off passengers).
Can I be very clear on this? I fully appreciate that most people believe that double white lines mean no overtaking. If the competition had simply asked “what do double white lines mean”, with no options, I could understand some confusion. If option 2 had been do not cross the lines, I could certainly appreciate the confusion. However, since everybody appears to be suggesting that it means no overtaking but it does not mean no parking, all I ask is that someone points out where the code supports this.
Obviously I appreciate the time you have taken, and I recognize your knowledge in this area, although I am a little confused by your comments that my position derives some support from rule 215. Rule 215 clearly states that you must not park where there are double white lines. Surely this fully supports my position? How everybody can carry on insisting that this doesn’t mean you cannot park is beyond me.
I can appreciate that you do not wish to get into a long protracted debate, but I would ask you to consider the following scenario. Assume I was following a vehicle, and I had a Traffic Police vehicle behind me. We were on a road with double white lines in the middle.
1)If I overtook the leading vehicle, without breaking the double white lines, would I be stopped, and if so which part of the Highway Code would the Officers refer to. If I wouldn’t be stopped, you cannot assert that the lines mean no overtaking.
2)If I parked at the side of the road, would I be stopped, and if so which part of the Highway Code would the Officers refer to. If I would be stopped, you must accept that the lines mean no parking.
Lady Godiva says to PH members: as you can see, apparently it is not as simple as we thought. We had read rule 215, where it states that you must not park where there are double white lines, and thought that it means you must not park where there are double white lines. However, GMTV and now the RACFoundation say this is not the case. How they work that out is beyond me.
I give in.....unfortunately my 'Gentleman Friend' won't!
Regards
Sally
P.S. Once and for all, is there any expert out there, serving traffic officer, Advanced Driver, etc, who can show me where the Highway Code forbids OVERTAKING where there are double white lines. Not breaking the lines. Overtaking. Not someones personal belief, or general understanding, just the written words "you must not overtake where there are double white lines". The same as where we have shown the written words (Rule 108) "you must not park where there are double white lines".
Surely it's not too much to ask. Please help. He's driving me mad!!!
Lady Godiva said:
You could try these guys. There good at getting on TV and always looking for an angle.
www.racfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=41
My 'Gentleman friend' contacted them as you recommended. He was slightly disapointed to receive comments back that stated that they (RACFoundation) believed GMTV to be correct.
My friend and I are more and more confused. I have duplicated the response from the foundation in full below, and our comments on it.
The RACFoundation said: I am always reluctant to contradict someone who is as sure of their facts as you seem to be, especially when I didn't see the original question. However, if you have accurately reproduced the question, I think you picked the wrong option, but read on, because it isn't simple.
Road markings [white lines] along the carriageway are dealt with on page 78 of my copy of the 1999 edition of the Highway Code. They include 'edge lines' which the question seems to specifically exclude, centre lines and hazard warning lines [Rule 106], double white lines [Rules 107/108], diagonal hatching [rule 109] and lane lines [rule 110]. Rule 108 does not mention parking, although Rule 215 does and includes double white lines among the list of places where you MUST NOT park..
Double white lines [Rule 107/108] are fully dealt with at Reg 26 Traffic Signs Regulations and General Direction 2002. Although primarily concerned with restrictions on overtaking, Reg 26 also prohibits stopping.....subject to a substantial list of exceptions including picking up or setting down passengers and loading and unloading. However the prohibition on stopping in Reg 26 is solely for the purposes of minimising the occasions in which it becomes necessary to pass a stationary vehicle and thus cross a solid white line.
On balance, I think GMTV's assertion is more closely aligned to the Highway Code, where Rule 108 relates only to overtaking. Whilst I recognise that yours derives some support from Rule 215 and Reg 26 TSRGD 2002, I nevertheless think that GMTV's assertion is more accurate. However the situation is not simple and if you decide to use my response in your dispute with GMTV, I must ask you to use it in full, rather than quoting selectively.
Head of Traffic and Road Safety
We replied: many thanks for your response.
My main concern is the statement that double white lines in the middle of the road mean no overtaking. While I appreciate that this may be the general understanding, I still maintain it is factually incorrect. That is why I invited GMTV to show where, in the Highway Code, it states that you must no overtake where there are double white lines. The Code clearly states that you must not cross the double white lines, but that is a different thing. There are many circumstances where you can overtake where there are double white lines.
However, the code specifically states (with a few exemptions) that you must not park where there are double white lines. Highway code, waiting and Parking, Rule 215, you must not stop or park where there are double white lines (except to pick up or drop off passengers).
Can I be very clear on this? I fully appreciate that most people believe that double white lines mean no overtaking. If the competition had simply asked “what do double white lines mean”, with no options, I could understand some confusion. If option 2 had been do not cross the lines, I could certainly appreciate the confusion. However, since everybody appears to be suggesting that it means no overtaking but it does not mean no parking, all I ask is that someone points out where the code supports this.
Obviously I appreciate the time you have taken, and I recognize your knowledge in this area, although I am a little confused by your comments that my position derives some support from rule 215. Rule 215 clearly states that you must not park where there are double white lines. Surely this fully supports my position? How everybody can carry on insisting that this doesn’t mean you cannot park is beyond me.
I can appreciate that you do not wish to get into a long protracted debate, but I would ask you to consider the following scenario. Assume I was following a vehicle, and I had a Traffic Police vehicle behind me. We were on a road with double white lines in the middle.
1)If I overtook the leading vehicle, without breaking the double white lines, would I be stopped, and if so which part of the Highway Code would the Officers refer to. If I wouldn’t be stopped, you cannot assert that the lines mean no overtaking.
2)If I parked at the side of the road, would I be stopped, and if so which part of the Highway Code would the Officers refer to. If I would be stopped, you must accept that the lines mean no parking.
Lady Godiva says to PH members: as you can see, apparently it is not as simple as we thought. We had read rule 215, where it states that you must not park where there are double white lines, and thought that it means you must not park where there are double white lines. However, GMTV and now the RACFoundation say this is not the case. How they work that out is beyond me.
I give in.....unfortunately my 'Gentleman Friend' won't!
Regards
Sally
P.S. Once and for all, is there any expert out there, serving traffic officer, Advanced Driver, etc, who can show me where the Highway Code forbids OVERTAKING where there are double white lines. Not breaking the lines. Overtaking. Not someones personal belief, or general understanding, just the written words "you must not overtake where there are double white lines". The same as where we have shown the written words (Rule 215) "you must not park where there are double white lines".
Surely it's not too much to ask. Please help. He's driving me mad!!!
Not sure if it helps but have you read rule 141: -
You MUST NOT overtake
if you would have to cross or straddle double white lines with a solid line nearest to you (but see Rule 108)
if you would have to enter an area designed to divide traffic, if it is surrounded by a solid white line
the nearest vehicle to a pedestrian crossing, especially when it has stopped to let pedestrians cross
if you would have to enter a lane reserved for buses, trams or cycles during its hours of operation
after a 'No Overtaking' sign and until you pass a sign cancelling the restriction.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36, TSRGD regs 10, 22, 23 & 24, ZPPPCRGD reg 24
Perhaps GMTV have misinterpreted this rule. If it is any consolation I agree that they are wrong
>> Edited by nismo200sx on Wednesday 24th May 15:40
>> Edited by nismo200sx on Wednesday 24th May 15:43
You MUST NOT overtake
if you would have to cross or straddle double white lines with a solid line nearest to you (but see Rule 108)
if you would have to enter an area designed to divide traffic, if it is surrounded by a solid white line
the nearest vehicle to a pedestrian crossing, especially when it has stopped to let pedestrians cross
if you would have to enter a lane reserved for buses, trams or cycles during its hours of operation
after a 'No Overtaking' sign and until you pass a sign cancelling the restriction.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36, TSRGD regs 10, 22, 23 & 24, ZPPPCRGD reg 24
Perhaps GMTV have misinterpreted this rule. If it is any consolation I agree that they are wrong
>> Edited by nismo200sx on Wednesday 24th May 15:40
>> Edited by nismo200sx on Wednesday 24th May 15:43
nismo200sx said:
Not sure if it helps but have you read rule 141: -
You MUST NOT overtake
if you would have to cross or straddle double white lines with a solid line nearest to you (but see Rule 108)
if you would have to enter an area designed to divide traffic, if it is surrounded by a solid white line
the nearest vehicle to a pedestrian crossing, especially when it has stopped to let pedestrians cross
if you would have to enter a lane reserved for buses, trams or cycles during its hours of operation
after a 'No Overtaking' sign and until you pass a sign cancelling the restriction.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36, TSRGD regs 10, 22, 23 & 24, ZPPPCRGD reg 24
Perhaps GMTV have misinterpreted this rule. If it is any consolation I agree that they are wrong
>> Edited by nismo200sx on Wednesday 24th May 15:40
>> Edited by nismo200sx on Wednesday 24th May 15:43
I have indeed read the rule, and it is indeed some consolation that many PH'ers (like your good self) agree GMTV are wrong. To our mind it is simple. You can see it. So can others. I can partly understand why GMTV won't admit they are wrong, as they would have to award prizes elsewhere. I am very surprised at the RACFoundation, but what can you do.
Thank you for your comments. I think I may carry a copy of this with me at all times, so if I get stopped by TrafPol I can wave it in their face.
Yours despondently waiting for GMTV to admit their error.
Sally.
leosayer said:
You can get double white lines separating opposing traffic on dual carriageways and on roads with 2 lanes in one direction and one in the other.
Are they really implying that you shouldn't overtake on a dual carriageway!
Are they really implying that you shouldn't overtake on a dual carriageway!
Unfortunately, that is exactly what they are implying. In fact, they are not implying it (which perhaps infers some ambiguity) they are stating it as a fact.
Without going too much over old ground, GMTV have said that you must not overtake where there are white lines (yes, even in the above circumstances), but you can park where there are white lines.
We are still waiting for the OfCom ruling. We have little doubt that it will support GMTV, as let's face it, the big corporations nearly always win. As GMTV are so indifferent to customer satisfaction, they can't really lose.
What's amazed me more than anything else is that the RACFoundation has also supported GMTV.
Bizarre. Its all bizarre.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff