Quick undertaking question...

[Chris71]

I hasten to add this isn't something I practice myself, but out of curiosity isn't there a law that says something along the lines that you're not responsible for the accident if you pull back into an inner lane and make contact with someone trying to undertake you on it?

I'm not trying to debate the wrongs of undertaking, but I have a vague recollection there is some sort of law or convention that puts you automatically at fault if an accident occurs whilst you're doing so?

[p1esk]

Chris71 said:

I hasten to add this isn't something I practice myself, but out of curiosity isn't there a law that says something along the lines that you're not responsible for the accident if you pull back into an inner lane and make contact with someone trying to undertake you on it?

I'm not trying to debate the wrongs of undertaking, but I have a vague recollection there is some sort of law or convention that puts you automatically at fault if an accident occurs whilst you're doing so?

I don't know what the correct answer is, but I expect it depends on the circumstances. The blame could go either way, or be shared, I expect.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Edited by p1esk on Monday 28th April 18:47

[Don]

Chris71 said:

I hasten to add this isn't something I practice myself, but out of curiosity isn't there a law that says something along the lines that you're not responsible for the accident if you pull back into an inner lane and make contact with someone trying to undertake you on it?

I'm not trying to debate the wrongs of undertaking, but I have a vague recollection there is some sort of law or convention that puts you automatically at fault if an accident occurs whilst you're doing so?

No law. No convention. However - if you pass on the left contrary to the rules in the Highway Code this could be construed as driving without due care and hence be an offence. It is legal to pass on the left. The HC says you can do so if the queue of traffic to your right is moving more slowly than your lane. This is clearly different to swerving about like a madman and overtaking on the left hand side and forcing your way back into a space way too small in the queue on the right two cars up...

If you drive into someone who happens to be passing on your left you didn't use your mirrors and you didn't check your blind spot. Doing this would, no doubt, be driving without due care and attention.

[Chris71]

So undertaking isn't strictly illegal then?

One thing I have noticed whilst digging around (it's for a blog post I hasten to add, I'm not preparing a legal defense or anything!) is that the ACPO but 'passing on the left' at the top of the examples of careless driving in their Road Death Investigation Manual.

http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/Data/rd_dea... (p75)

The cause of the rant isnn't undertaking itself, it's the people who come flying up the inside of a large stream of traffic which is overtaking something, and fail to realise this won't get them anywhere. Their stupidity amazes me. In this particular case, the fact it it may or may not be illegal (and certainly constitues bad manners) is secondary to the sheer pointlessness of what they're doing!

[7db]

Chris71 said:

The cause of the rant isnn't undertaking itself, it's the people who come flying up the inside of a large stream of traffic which is overtaking something, and fail to realise this won't get them anywhere. Their stupidity amazes me. In this particular case, the fact it it may or may not be illegal (and certainly constitues bad manners) is secondary to the sheer pointlessness of what they're doing!

The other side of that particular coin is all those people occupying an outside lane when the inside lane is free and they are not overtaking anyone, contrary to the HC and S3 RTA, inconsiderately causing an inconvenience to other road users.

The pot, passing on the inside of these kettles, is established in lane. If you change lanes and cause someone established in lane to brake or change direction in order to avoid an accident (or indeed you cause the accident) then you have your S2/3 right there and the option to follow up with the insurance claim.

The courts are a lottery, of course, and insurance claims doubly so. Witnesses who don't stop, insurers who'd rather settle. Definitely best to avoid the collisions altogether as there's no black and white.

[BertBert]

7db said:

...as there's no black and white.

In the world of the pot and kettle there is!
Bert

[Chris71]

7db said:

Chris71 said:

The cause of the rant isnn't undertaking itself, it's the people who come flying up the inside of a large stream of traffic which is overtaking something, and fail to realise this won't get them anywhere. Their stupidity amazes me. In this particular case, the fact it it may or may not be illegal (and certainly constitues bad manners) is secondary to the sheer pointlessness of what they're doing!

The other side of that particular coin is all those people occupying an outside lane when the inside lane is free and they are not overtaking anyone, contrary to the HC and S3 RTA, inconsiderately causing an inconvenience to other road users.

The pot, passing on the inside of these kettles, is established in lane. If you change lanes and cause someone established in lane to brake or change direction in order to avoid an accident (or indeed you cause the accident) then you have your S2/3 right there and the option to follow up with the insurance claim.

The courts are a lottery, of course, and insurance claims doubly so. Witnesses who don't stop, insurers who'd rather settle. Definitely best to avoid the collisions altogether as there's no black and white.

I quite agree, but they're only there (rather than the empty inside lane) because of poor lane discipline. It's debatable what works best in the real world (with some people ignoring this), but in theory if everyone treated motorways more like a normal road and only moved to the outer lanes to overtake, then there would no longer be any point in undertaking. The outer lanes would, by definition end up travelling faster.

It's of no great consequence - just a quick query to check the legality of it as I've just put a related post up on my blog:

http://chriscarblog.blogspot.com/

[RobM77]

Could someone explain the Highway code with respect to this please?
What consitutes a queue of traffic? What if I, cruising at 70mph in lane 1, come across a queue of ten cars doing 60mph in lane 3 and they're all overtaking one car in lane 2 500 yards ahead, with lane 1 completely clear? (very common, especially in off peak periods on the M25). What is legal and illegal in that situation? I normally just join the queue in lane 3 and wait, but am I wasting my time?

[Dr Jekyll]

Passing on the inside can be construed as dangerous driving. I've posted before about a friend who is waiting for a DD case to come up due to witnesses who claim he not only passed on the left (which he denies) but moved across two lanes to pass middle lane vehicles on the right (which he admits).

I can't wait to discover what (if anything) you are supposed to do when someone is in the middle with nothing on the inside.

Do middle lane crawlers ever get a talking to? If not, why not?

[RobM77]

Dr Jekyll said:

Passing on the inside can be construed as dangerous driving. I've posted before about a friend who is waiting for a DD case to come up due to witnesses who claim he not only passed on the left (which he denies) but moved across two lanes to pass middle lane vehicles on the right (which he admits).

I can't wait to discover what (if anything) you are supposed to do when someone is in the middle with nothing on the inside.

Do middle lane crawlers ever get a talking to? If not, why not?

What's wrong with moving across two lanes to pass a middle lane hogger? What are you supposed to do when you come across one and you're in lane 1?

[Dr Jekyll]

RobM77 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Passing on the inside can be construed as dangerous driving. I've posted before about a friend who is waiting for a DD case to come up due to witnesses who claim he not only passed on the left (which he denies) but moved across two lanes to pass middle lane vehicles on the right (which he admits).

I can't wait to discover what (if anything) you are supposed to do when someone is in the middle with nothing on the inside.

Do middle lane crawlers ever get a talking to? If not, why not?

What's wrong with moving across two lanes to pass a middle lane hogger? What are you supposed to do when you come across one and you're in lane 1?

That's what I'm curious about.

[7db]

Nothing as long as the way in which you do it isn't dangerous.

[waremark]

RobM77 said:

Could someone explain the Highway code with respect to this please?
What consitutes a queue of traffic?

HWC does not refer to queues - nor (another frequent misquote, although not mentioned here) to slow traffic. It refers to traffic moving in lanes at similar speeds. There is no definition of what this means.

I find that overtaking on the left is sufficiently common that just as much care is needed when changing lanes to the left as when changing lanes to the right.

[p1esk]

waremark said:

RobM77 said:

Could someone explain the Highway code with respect to this please?
What consitutes a queue of traffic?

HWC does not refer to queues - nor (another frequent misquote, although not mentioned here) to slow traffic. It refers to traffic moving in lanes at similar speeds. There is no definition of what this means.

I find that overtaking on the left is sufficiently common that just as much care is needed when changing lanes to the left as when changing lanes to the right.

Agreed, but I'm not happy about the idea (sometimes suggested) that we should be completely free to overtake either side. It seems to me preferable to encourage drivers to behave in a way that makes it largely unnecessary, e.g. better lane discipline etc.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[K4TRV]

Lane discipline?

More and more drivers appear totally insecure in changing lanes.

The old "adage", it may well have been in the HC of old - "Keep left except when overtaking" means nothing to most drivers I come across.

The worst aspect of today is to see on a 2-lane dual highway, a "line" of vehicles in the right hand lane matching the enforced 50mph limit (despite the road being capable of supporting the national limit of 70) ready to take the third exit of a roundabout 2-miles before the roundabout.

Drivers wishing to take the first or second exit have to keep station in an empty lane sometimes travelling at less that the 50 limit incase they undertake ??

Just bonkers and wish we could somehow enforce "keep left except when overtaking" ??

The innocent (sheep following one another in the right hand lane) are the real guilty drivers, driving without Due Care and Attention, perhaps??

Trev McM.

[waremark]

Not the way I read it. Most of the time when there is a long line of cars in an overtaking lane travelling relatively slowly it is because they all want to overtake what may only be one vehicle in lane 1, and those behind all have to travel at the speed of the slowest. Because they all want to overtake they are entitled to 'stay out', and to overtake them on the left in the expectation of moving out into the overtaking line nearer the vehicle in lane 1 is to queue jump. There is no easy solution. It might be tempting to have a minimum speed limit say of 55 mph in lane 2 and 65 mph in lane 3, but this would not work in dense traffic.

[K4TRV]

waremark said:

Not the way I read it. Most of the time when there is a long line of cars in an overtaking lane travelling relatively slowly it is because they all want to overtake what may only be one vehicle in lane 1, and those behind all have to travel at the speed of the slowest. Because they all want to overtake they are entitled to 'stay out', and to overtake them on the left in the expectation of moving out into the overtaking line nearer the vehicle in lane 1 is to queue jump. There is no easy solution. It might be tempting to have a minimum speed limit say of 55 mph in lane 2 and 65 mph in lane 3, but this would not work in dense traffic.

That wasn't what I was describing.

All the drivers in the outside lane want to turn right in 2-miles time.

No-one wants to be in the nearside lane and change lanes when they approach a roundabout.

There is no-one to overtake............!! That's the point.

Trev McM

[cw42]

Last October I took a job in Oldham, and have been commuting along this stretch of the m60 since then http://tinyurl.com/5el6x2
The amount of people that have no confidence when driving the motorway beggers belief! Every night, without fail, there will be at least 2 or 3 cars hogging the middle lane, and this is at night, from 21:30 on, when the road is clear.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bM3mR5G6LQ is how I did it earlier this year.

[p1esk]

cw42 said:

Last October I took a job in Oldham, and have been commuting along this stretch of the m60 since then http://tinyurl.com/5el6x2
The amount of people that have no confidence when driving the motorway beggers belief! Every night, without fail, there will be at least 2 or 3 cars hogging the middle lane, and this is at night, from 21:30 on, when the road is clear.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bM3mR5G6LQ is how I did it earlier this year.

Von - this fellow needs banning immediately. Fix it up would you?

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Sharief]

cw42 said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bM3mR5G6LQ is how I did it earlier this year.

I think it's fair to say you dominated that road.