Undertaking....

[lyonspride]

vonhosen said:

You can do absolutely anything of your choosing if A) You don't get caught or B) You'll accept the consequences that follow if you do get caught.

TBH I can't find any record (or even a hint) of anyone ever being prosecuted for "undertaking", I think as long as your not swerving about and driving like an idiot then nothing would come of ti.

[vonhosen]

lyonspride said:

vonhosen said:

You can do absolutely anything of your choosing if A) You don't get caught or B) You'll accept the consequences that follow if you do get caught.

TBH I can't find any record (or even a hint) of anyone ever being prosecuted for "undertaking", I think as long as your not swerving about and driving like an idiot then nothing would come of ti.

Let me help clear that up for you then.
You wouldn't because it's not a specific legislated offence, it would just be within the group of Sec 2/3 RTA (which is where MLMing would be too).
And here is a motoring journalist & his experience of the outcome.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/the-wrongs-of-under...

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 19th March 13:27

[Liquid Knight]

I bring this up on the "Knob" thread pretty much every time I use the M25

I am driving at the speed limit, using the lane to my left unless overtaking. If that means I happen to filter past a load of inconsiderate twunts in lanes two, three or four then so be it.

As mentioned already. If they were driving properly they would not feel they are being undertaken. If people followed the rules then instead of being in lanes three and four crawling along at forty to fifty they would be making much better progress.

If the road is quiet and I catch up to someone in lane three (usually) I will go out from lane one, to two, then three, flash my headlights so they know I am there, lane four to overtake and back to lane three as soon as I am a safe distance ahead of them, then two and one. If they stay out in lane three and can't take a hint them.

My favorite thing is if I filter past someone and they get a monkey in their butt about it and decide to overtake me to "make a point" only to then have to slow down again due to the next half lemming twunt hybrid impeding their progress.

[Pica-Pica]

vonhosen said:

lyonspride said:

vonhosen said:

You can do absolutely anything of your choosing if A) You don't get caught or B) You'll accept the consequences that follow if you do get caught.

TBH I can't find any record (or even a hint) of anyone ever being prosecuted for "undertaking", I think as long as your not swerving about and driving like an idiot then nothing would come of ti.

Let me help clear that up for you then.
You wouldn't because it's not a specific legislated offence, it would just be within the group of Sec 2/3 RTA (which is where MLMing would be too).
And here is a motoring journalist & his experience of the outcome.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/the-wrongs-of-under...

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 19th March 13:27

For me, the undertaking was seriously compounded by moving to lane 1 as an entering slip road was approaching.

[Flumpo]

I drive 500 miles a week all on the m1 and the mlm is the most frustrating part of the journey. I drive between 6pm and 11pm and the sheer amount of mlm is unbelievable.

If you drive in lane one you can drive often for miles passing loads of cars in l2 who seem oblivious. I’m not talking about people who should pull into l1 but can see they are gaining on a car up front slowly so can’t be bothered. It’s full on empty for as far as the eye can see, but I like l2 and I’m not moving.

The worst part is when this causes a blockage and someone is sat in l2 doing 68 and likely another mlm, decides to overtake at 69. The whole time l1 is empty as far as you can see.

I find 9/10 times they also have fog lights on regardless of the conditions.

L3 hoggers are rarer but when you do get one it’s very frustrating.

[mac96]

Pica-Pica said:

For me, the undertaking was seriously compounded by moving to lane 1 as an entering slip road was approaching.

Agreed and also the lanes are narrow so an undertaker is in danger of being sideswiped, with no hard shoulder as escape route.
It’s an example of a place where undertaking is dangerous. It’s not proof that it’s always dangerous.

[vonhosen]

mac96 said:

Pica-Pica said:

For me, the undertaking was seriously compounded by moving to lane 1 as an entering slip road was approaching.

Agreed and also the lanes are narrow so an undertaker is in danger of being sideswiped, with no hard shoulder as escape route.
It’s an example of a place where undertaking is dangerous. It’s not proof that it’s always dangerous.

The allegation is rarely going to one of danger (so there would be no requirement to show evidence of it), it's merely falling below the standards expected.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic...

[mac96]

vonhosen said:

mac96 said:

Pica-Pica said:

For me, the undertaking was seriously compounded by moving to lane 1 as an entering slip road was approaching.

Agreed and also the lanes are narrow so an undertaker is in danger of being sideswiped, with no hard shoulder as escape route.
It’s an example of a place where undertaking is dangerous. It’s not proof that it’s always dangerous.

The allegation is rarely going to one of danger (so there would be no requirement to show evidence of it), it's merely falling below the standards expected.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic...

No doubt you are correct but I was using the word ‘dangerous ‘ in an everyday sense. The whole point of traffic law is ultimately about minimising risk which should be a drivers priority also.
I know that stretch of the A3. It’s not a good place to speed or undertake regardless of the law.

[Nampahc Niloc]

So to sum up the consensus on this thread:

“It’s ok for me to break he Highway Code because the person in the middle lane is pissing me off and also breaking the Highway Code”

The Highway Code is very clear on this point:

Rule 267
Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right.

There is no mention of it being ok to overtake on the left if you feel it’s safe (or easier) to do so.

Drivers are much more likely to move to the left without warning or checking their blind spot. You might think you have the moral high ground, but that’s not much use if you die in a high speed crash.

[mko9]

Nampahc Niloc said:

Drivers are much more likely to move to the left without warning or checking their blind spot.

Based upon what evidence?

[feef]

Nampahc Niloc said:

So to sum up the consensus on this thread:

“It’s ok for me to break he Highway Code because the person in the middle lane is pissing me off and also breaking the Highway Code”

The Highway Code is very clear on this point:

Rule 267
Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right.

There is no mention of it being ok to overtake on the left if you feel it’s safe (or easier) to do so.

Drivers are much more likely to move to the left without warning or checking their blind spot. You might think you have the moral high ground, but that’s not much use if you die in a high speed crash.

In addition

Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake

[Pothole]

zetec said:

...yes I know this has most probably been done to death.

I see what you did, there.

[RobM77]

feef said:

Nampahc Niloc said:

So to sum up the consensus on this thread:

“It’s ok for me to break he Highway Code because the person in the middle lane is pissing me off and also breaking the Highway Code”

The Highway Code is very clear on this point:

Rule 267
Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right.

There is no mention of it being ok to overtake on the left if you feel it’s safe (or easier) to do so.

Drivers are much more likely to move to the left without warning or checking their blind spot. You might think you have the moral high ground, but that’s not much use if you die in a high speed crash.

In addition

Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake

All of that is true, but there are consequences to not passing a lane hogger, and often these can be dangerous, as many of us have covered in our posts already. Traffic can bunch right up across all three lanes, causing some people to charge down the inside dangerously and without warning. A PHer posted about an accident a few years ago that centered around a lane hogger - yes, the accident wasn't the lane hogger's fault legally, but they started the chain of events that caused someone to pull a dangerous manoeuvre and it ended very badly for several cars. I do 25k-35k miles a year, much of it on the motorway and I've seen similar accidents nearly happen a few times myself (nothing to do with me I should add, I've been in the queue to pass on most occasions). Passing on the left can, if done carefully, stop the 'pressure' building up behind the lane hogger.

[MaxSo]

I have used lane 1 to glide gently past vehicles in lane 2 / 3 / 4 from time to time. But I'm aware that this (by my understanding of the letter of the law) is illegal (unless in heavy congestion).

If I can easily move out to lane 2 then 3, I will.

If I can't, then to my mind the road is congested... whether it is congested enough to permit undertaking is obviously open to interpretation.

Like most issues on the roads, if people drove using appropriate following distances, this problem would be greatly reduced - as it would be far easier to safely move out to lane 2 and 3 to overtake.

Biggest problem on the roads and contributor to almost every issue and annoyance..? ....... people driving too close to the vehicle in front. If we can fix that, driving in this country would be so much more pleasant.

[lyonspride]

MaxSo said:

Biggest problem on the roads and contributor to almost every issue and annoyance..? ....... people driving too close to the vehicle in front. If we can fix that, driving in this country would be so much more pleasant.

Nah, the biggest problem is passive-aggressive drivers who love nothing more than pissing off other people.

As for tailgating, if your doing 40 in a 60 limit in front of me, i'm going to be right on the 2 second gap, which at 40 is not a great distance. I think that these 40 everywhere morons bring it on themselves and assume that people are tailgating when (taking speed into consideration) they are not.

I drive at the speed limit by my speedometer, which puts my actual and GPS speed at 7% less than that. I can count on one hand the number of times i've been tailgated in the last 10 years, on the other hand some people complain they get tailgated every single minute they're in their car, it seems pretty obvious who is at fault.

This is where we get the usual one line excuses for driving incompetence, like "it's a limit not a target", well actually the speed limit is the speed you should be doing if conditions allow and failing to do so is still a failure in the UK driving test. Or "it's not a race", well no because if it was a race i'd be driving it flat out, not gently shifting through the gears with the highest degree of mechanical sympathy trying to reach a reasonable speed that doesn't cause inconvenience to other road users, because shock horror I have better things to do than methodically winding up other drivers.

[Nampahc Niloc]

lyonspride said:

As for tailgating, if your doing 40 in a 60 limit in front of me, i'm going to be right on the 2 second gap, which at 40 is not a great distance.

So you leave a 36 meter gap at 40mph?

Seems a good size gap to me and I don’t think anyone would consider that being tailgated. I assume you also leave a 63 meter gap on the motorway?

[Pica-Pica]

Nampahc Niloc said:

lyonspride said:

As for tailgating, if your doing 40 in a 60 limit in front of me, i'm going to be right on the 2 second gap, which at 40 is not a great distance.

So you leave a 36 meter gap at 40mph?

Seems a good size gap to me and I don’t think anyone would consider that being tailgated. I assume you also leave a 63 meter gap on the motorway?

One issue with being followed closely, is that you cannot see their indicators. This is especially so with modern saloons with high narrow rear screens.

[Superleg48]

I learnt to drive playing Outrun. Don’t you just swerve all over the road, overtaking and undertaking and making use of every last inch of clear tarmac in front of you in order to get to your destination “The Finish Line” in the shortest possible time?

On a serious note, surely smooth consistent progress in any lane will be fine with Plod, provided you are:

1. Observing the Speed Limit
2. Not causing a Danger to other Road Users through erratic driving.
3. Carefully observing the moron and have a plan to execute if they do something odd like suddenly decide they are going to move back into Lane 1.

The Law will be literal but often times will be veiwed by Her Majesty’s Finest with a degree of interpretation and context.

[MaxSo]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

1. Which point does it miss?

2. I was talking about me moving from lane 1 to 2 to avoid undertaking a MLM. If there is a stream of vehicles closely following the MLM (but not necessarily aggressively tailgating the MLM, and each other) then it can be, on occasion, be difficult to ***safely*** move from lane 1 to 2 (ie. whilst maintaining a safety bubble). I think many who drive frequently and safely on busy motorways could say they've experienced this. Many, however, do seem content to drastically reduce the size of the safety bubble in order to move into a gap between vehicles (often a gap that was already too short). If the vehicles following the MLM had increased separations, it would be less difficult to safely move from lane 1 to 2, and ultimately to lane 3 to overtake the MLM legally. Hence, I and others have on occasion chosen to carefully undertake the MLM as, despite being illegal, it is judged to be the safer and less hazardous of the two ways of passing the MLM.

So, this is one example of a problem that people encounter that could be mitigated if people allowed more suitable separations.

Of course, the problem wouldn't exist if the MLM wasn't a MLM and was in lane 1, but that doesn't negate the fact that the problem could be reduced by larger separations.

Also, as you identified, there is a good chance the MLM became a MLM because they believe they would get 'trapped' in lane 1. If the people allowed suitable separation, a MLM who became a MLM for this reason would potentially see that they are able to move safely and easily between lanes and hence be less inclined to be a MLM.

It quite clearly is't indicative of my own mindset, otherwise I wouldn't have been in lane 1...

[MaxSo]

lyonspride said:

Nah, the biggest problem is passive-aggressive drivers who love nothing more than pissing off other people.

As for tailgating, if your doing 40 in a 60 limit in front of me, i'm going to be right on the 2 second gap, which at 40 is not a great distance. I think that these 40 everywhere morons bring it on themselves and assume that people are tailgating when (taking speed into consideration) they are not.

I drive at the speed limit by my speedometer, which puts my actual and GPS speed at 7% less than that. I can count on one hand the number of times i've been tailgated in the last 10 years, on the other hand some people complain they get tailgated every single minute they're in their car, it seems pretty obvious who is at fault.

This is where we get the usual one line excuses for driving incompetence, like "it's a limit not a target", well actually the speed limit is the speed you should be doing if conditions allow and failing to do so is still a failure in the UK driving test. Or "it's not a race", well no because if it was a race i'd be driving it flat out, not gently shifting through the gears with the highest degree of mechanical sympathy trying to reach a reasonable speed that doesn't cause inconvenience to other road users, because shock horror I have better things to do than methodically winding up other drivers.

I think there's a difference between following too closely (I think almost everyone does this sometimes - me included), and tailgating - which I consider to be a clearly aggressive short following distance by someone who is trying to 'push along' the car in front or bully them into getting out of the way by whatever method.

If you're doing 40mph on a stretch of NSL single carriageway, I too would be at least 2 seconds behind you (in the dry, clement weather etc). I would be more than 2 seconds behind you, at some points (nearing junctions, for example). I may, but usually not, get a little closer (down to perhaps 1.5s) when I'm preparing to overtake you. Of course, assuming you are in a car, it can be a little frustrating for you to be doing only 40, but you are well within your rights to be doing so. I've also got to consider that you may be elderly, an inexperienced driver, perhaps you have some other problems which lead you to prefer to travel at a lower speed. Perhaps you were involved in an accident and are still finding your feet behind the wheel again. Anyway, I try not to let your lower speed annoy me. I might even imagine you are my Grandmother and think how I would wish people would drive around her. And besides, 40mph is the speed limit for a HGV so there's every chance there is a HGV doing 40mph a little further up the road anyway.

Conditions allowing, I drive at least at the speed limit as indicated by Waze, normally +7%. I am frequently followed by other vehicles at a distance which is less than a 2s gap. So whilst I wouldn't call this tailgating, these vehicles are following too closely.

I'm not aware of anything that states the applicable speed limit is the speed at which all traffic should be travelling, conditions allowing. Do you have a link to this?

I am aware that learners can be failed for driving too slowly. I think in a test scenario, the examiner is looking to ascertain that the learner is aware of the speed limit, and is able to drive at speeds approaching the posted limit. Once a person has a driving licence, I' not aware that there is any requirement to drive at or near the speed limit. The police would likely be interested if someone was driving excessively slowly for prolonged distances, as it may be indicative of other misdemeanours, such as drink driving. I think driving at car at 40mph on a NSL single carriageway road is unlikely to raise any police interest, not least because it is the limit for other types of vehicles on that road.

If you're doing 40mph where the limit is 60mph, I wouldn't think you are trying to wind me up. Not unless perhaps you had been driving at 60mph previously, or kept fluctuating between 40mph and 60mph. I wouldn't think most people who drive cars at 40mph where the limit is 60mph, are trying to wind other people up. I think it's more likely they fall into one of the categories I mentioned above.

What I do think would be good if is everyone following you doing 40mph, left a suitable gap to the vehicle in front, so that if I, or someone else, wanted to carry on making good, safe progress, we could safely overtake cars in the line of traffic behind you, moving back to nearside into the suitable gaps where necessary.

This is another example of a problem, that would be mitigated if people left suitable following gaps.