Pulled over for "undertaking"

[keith2.2]

A genuine query as I'd like to further my understanding;

A couple of nights ago (roughtly 6pm) I was in Lane 3 on 4-lane section of the M25, and was due to pull off in 1.5 miles. Relatively high volume of traffic but it was moving along at about 60-70mph

Maintaining my speed, I pulled left into Lane 2 after overtaking a car. Lane 2 was empty, lanes 3 and 4 were full of cars.

I then pulled into Lane 1 having passed a lorry. With just under a mile to the junction, I came up behind another lorry, so pulled out (still doing aroudn 65mph - I haven't slowed or accelerated at this stage) - after indication - to overtake. There was a car in lane 3 sitting at a similar speed to the lorry meaning I drove between them.

I then pulled back into Lane 1 ready to turn off.

Then the blue and red christmas tree appeared in my rvm. I must admit I had suspected, as the car that I had driven pased (me in Lane 2, it in lane 3) had then pulled into lane 2 behind me.

The officer said that "...undertaking falls under the Due Care offence. However, I was actually very impressed with the general standard of your driving, so I'm going to issue a written referal for undertaking on a motorway".

I asked - in a non-cocky way(!) - for a bit of clarification on the "going with the flow of traffic" rule - Hway Code 268 or 278 I think (I didn't quote that at the time, didn't want to look like I was trying to be a smartarse) and was told (correctly, as I have subsequently read) that the act of moving lanes "to gain an advantage over the other traffic" is what marks an undertake out from flow of traffic. I take this to mean that had I been in that lane in the first place, it wouldn't have coutned.

My queries are as follows:

1) Do we assume therefore that the undertaking rule takes precidence over the keep-left unless overtaking rule? I could understand why this might be as there is a safety implication to undertaking.

2) I'm a bit miffed as I hadn't seen the car in front and thought "I'm going round it" - I thought I was driving very sensibly in planning my exit in good time thus gradually moving left, and maintaining an appropriate speed to the prevailing conditions. Should I in fact have pulled left in the first instance and then sat just aft of the unmarked car?

3) My overtake of the second lorry - that meant I drove "under" a car in Lane 3 - ignoring the option of staying behind the lorry for a mile, that I could have done - not going past the car in Lane 3 would have meant not being able to complete an otherwise entirely appropriate overtake, and would potentially have lead me to being unable to exit at my junction unless I then reduced my speed by about 15mph to come back behind the lorry - which seems to me to be a much more dangerous option? There certainly wasn't an option to move to Lane 4 to overtake the car as well.

I don't intend to contest whatever comes through the post - I'd just like some clarity from someone who knows as to whether I was indeed wholly in the wrong, or whether I was a bit unlucky on what seems a grey area?

I certainly didn't like to suggest at the time that it wouldn't have been possible to undertake either the police car or the car next to the lorry had they been observing correct lane discipline themselves - particualry with regards to the new law. It was all very cordial and I said Merry Christmas as I left the car!

Thanks
Keith

[Rude-boy]

keith2.2 said:

....


I don't intend to contest whatever comes through the post - I'd just like some clarity from someone who knows as to whether I was indeed wholly in the wrong, or whether I was a bit unlucky on what seems a grey area?

I certainly didn't like to suggest at the time that it wouldn't have been possible to undertake either the police car or the car next to the lorry had they been observing correct lane discipline themselves - particualry with regards to the new law. It was all very cordial and I said Merry Christmas as I left the car!

Thanks
Keith

Not my field but my personal, non professional, opinion is that you hit a grey area in so far as you were in contravention of the law based upon a personal opinion of an officer where it is for them to exercise their judgement as to if you are changing lanes to facilitate an overtaking manoeuvre.

I have not read that bit of law recently but also it interests me that you went lane 1 > 2 > 1 and were stopped for undertaking a car in Lane 3. If you had gone 3 > 2 > 3 that, in my book is facilitating your overtake by changing lanes.

I also believe that your statement that the undertake during your manoeuvre was only occasioned as a result of the car in lane 3 being in the wrong lane and there for being in breach of the rules of the road in the first place (although 2 wrongs do not make a right)is of interest.

As the officer just chose to have a word (as it appears to me from your post, the naughty boy letter will mean naff all so long as you keep your nose clean for a while) I’d leave it there. If they were on a power trip and had advised you they would be reporting you for the offence I would make it a mission to cause them as much st and hassle as humanly possible, including looking at the possibility of a report/private action in relation to their driving failures which put you in the position in the first place as I dare say if they had been in lane 2 you would have followed the lorry, there being insufficient time to go out to L3 and back in time for a safe exit.

Edited by Rude-boy on Thursday 19th December 12:31

[johnfm]

What a complete waste of police time.

Have they nothing better to do?

[RemaL]

johnfm said:

What a complete waste of police time.

Have they nothing better to do?

Seems not

[Davel]

It's an interesting thread though.

You chose to overtake a vehicle from lane 1 and not to undertake a vehicle which was in lane 3.

It could be argued that, if lane 2 was empty, WTF were all those cars doing in lane 3?

Or am I talking rubbish?

- Oh and I would have done the same as you and 'may' have done in the past...

Edited by Davel on Thursday 19th December 15:11

[Hooli]

RemaL said:

johnfm said:

What a complete waste of police time.

Have they nothing better to do?

Seems not

The correct use of police time would have been to pull the 'tard sitting in L3 & charge them with lack of due care & attention (ie not realising they are in the wrong lane).

[Du1point8]

Is the police officer driving going to do themselves for careless driving of being in the wrong lane?

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-penalties-f...

If the middle lane is clear then they should be using it instead of sitting in the outside lane.

[aw51 121565]

Hooli said:

RemaL said:

johnfm said:

What a complete waste of police time.

Have they nothing better to do?

Seems not

The correct use of police time would have been to pull the 'tard sitting in L3 & charge them with lack of due care & attention (ie not realising they are in the wrong lane).

and I presume that driver was not stopped and has got away with it. What a skewed view of the road that police officer must have .

[podwin]

Davel said:

You chose to overtake a vehicle from lane 1 and not to undertake a vehicle which was in lane 3.

It could be argued that, if lane 2 was empty, WTF were all those cars doing in lane 3?

I agree.

Waste of police time.

They should be looking out for the drivers actively undertaking to get in front of the car there were originally behind in the same lane.

[talksthetorque]

If he's pulling people on the M25 for lane discipline, he must have the highest detection rate in the force.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Hooli said:

RemaL said:

johnfm said:

What a complete waste of police time.

Have they nothing better to do?

Seems not

The correct use of police time would have been to pull the 'tard sitting in L3 & charge them with lack of due care & attention (ie not realising they are in the wrong lane).

Ra ra ra.....nothing better to do....ra ra ra......donughts....ra ra ra....catching murderers......ra ra ra....ego trip.....

[Einion Yrth]

Mk3Spitfire said:

Ra ra ra.....nothing better to do....ra ra ra......donughts....ra ra ra....catching murderers......ra ra ra....ego trip.....

Well that was a marvellously informative contribution, I must say.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Einion Yrth said:

Well that was a marvellously informative contribution, I must say.

Thanks mate. Although if you look really hard.....never mind.

[Terminator X]

Rude-boy said:

As the officer just chose to have a word (as it appears to me from your post, the naughty boy letter will mean naff all so long as you keep your nose clean for a while) I’d leave it there. If they were on a power trip and had advised you they would be reporting you for the offence I would make it a mission to cause them as much st and hassle as humanly possible, including looking at the possibility of a report/private action in relation to their driving failures which put you in the position in the first place as I dare say if they had been in lane 2 you would have followed the lorry, there being insufficient time to go out to L3 and back in time for a safe exit.

Edited by Rude-boy on Thursday 19th December 12:31

He'll get a £100 fine and 3pts surely given the recent change in the Law ie careless driving?

TX.

[mrtwisty]

I'm going to follow this one with some interest, especially when our resident bib chip in.

I 'undertake' no end of cars going 1> 2> 1, when lane 3 is jam packed with cars nose to tail, leaving 1 & 2 almost empty.

Perhaps I should be thrown in the chokey for a few years for being such a wantonly reckless madman?

[Rude-boy]

podwin said:

I agree.

Waste of police time.

They should be looking out for the drivers actively undertaking to get in front of the car there were originally behind in the same lane.

With the law as it stands I tend to agree.

As a driver who has had to spend many, many hours of their life sat behind a car in lane 2 of a D/C or 3 of a Mway as they bumble along at 65mph with nothing in lane 1/2 I have considerable sympathy with those that undertake safely – ie can do so without causing any other traffic to have to react to their manoeuvre.

[LoonR1]

Interesting discussion so far. As usual I want to put the other view and reference the initial move from lane 3 to 2 to 1 then back to lane 2. I know the MLM in lane 3 was in the wrong but the correct course should've been to move to lane 4 to overtake him then move back to lane 2 for the lorry overtake mad into lane 1 ahead of the exit.

You could also have sat in lane 3 until past the lorry and then move in or move to lane 2 and sit just behind the MLM.

Either way there's likely to have been something else to attract plods attention or maybe they just thought you were starting to weave to cut through the congestion.

Doing the moves 1-1.5 miles away from your junction seems a bit early to me personally.

Either way, I'd have pulled level on the nearsidr of the MLM, stared at him, sworn a little then planted it and definitely have got pulled.

[Hooli]

Mk3Spitfire said:

Hooli said:

RemaL said:

johnfm said:

What a complete waste of police time.

Have they nothing better to do?

Seems not

The correct use of police time would have been to pull the 'tard sitting in L3 & charge them with lack of due care & attention (ie not realising they are in the wrong lane).

Ra ra ra.....nothing better to do....ra ra ra......donughts....ra ra ra....catching murderers......ra ra ra....ego trip.....

Now re-read what I said. Pulling cars for poor driving is a good use of police time but in this case the plod seems to have pulled the wrong car.

[richie99]

Hooli said:

The correct use of police time would have been to pull the 'tard sitting in L3 & charge them with lack of due care & attention (ie not realising they are in the wrong lane).

My reading of the OP is that the 'tard in Lane 3 was the Police.

[Swervin_Mervin]

LoonR1 said:

Either way, I'd have pulled level on the nearsidr of the MLM, stared at him, sworn a little then planted it and definitely have got pulled.

You and many others of us I suspect.

IMO OP was unlucky to hit a grey area and got a lecture from a plod who ironically had been practising poor lane discipline himself.