How to block the motorway without really trying

[advanceddriver]

Rebuilda said:

the driver of the offending car looked most shocked when the BiB pulled up along side after having to take to the hard shoulder to avoid a collision with the car in front.

Maybe the BiB should have left a bigger gap then!

There is no lane disipline in this country because no one is taught it ever! The only way to travel at a higher speed than the car in front is to overtake on the left. It's natural progession the more people do it the less of an offence it will seem to be. So everyone start overtaking the morons on the left!

[waremark]

vonhosen said:

Leave me to deal with the lane hogger & I will.

Hi VH. Does that mean that you are or have been a serving traffic officer, or would you get involved in this sort of thing as an instructor?

Back to the original point: I would welcome you or your friends 'dealing with' weaving in and out of traffic or other 'aggressive' overtaking on the left. However, I think you would be wrong to 'deal with' careful overtaking on the left, carried out prudently and after the overtaken vehicle has been given both a warning of presence and the opportunity to move over. Since para 242 of the just replaced HWC makes no reference to the absolute speed of traffic, this para should be available to cover most safe passes on the left.

[vonhosen]

waremark said:

vonhosen said:

Leave me to deal with the lane hogger & I will.

Hi VH. Does that mean that you are or have been a serving traffic officer, or would you get involved in this sort of thing as an instructor?

Back to the original point: I would welcome you or your friends 'dealing with' weaving in and out of traffic or other 'aggressive' overtaking on the left. However, I think you would be wrong to 'deal with' careful overtaking on the left, carried out prudently and after the overtaken vehicle has been given both a warning of presence and the opportunity to move over. Since para 242 of the just replaced HWC makes no reference to the absolute speed of traffic, this para should be available to cover most safe passes on the left.

You think I'd be wrong, but I don't. C'est la vie.

[Brother Mycroft]

vonhosen said:

Leave me to deal with the lane hogger & I will.

That is no good at all.

The ratio of 'cops on the spot' when anything happens is so low that frankly you will be too far away to be of any real use.

So, waiting for a traffic cop to deal with something that has an immediate, simple solution that relieves stress and frustration and eases the flow of traffic is a good thing.

Common sense... support it!

[naetype]

Brother Mycroft said:

Keeping to the left is not stopped by overtaking on the left, far from it, with the knowledge that you can be most people will get over to the left as early as they can to avoid the additional hassle of looking around them more or if they drive conscientiously [as most people do] then such a measure wil actually firce them to have a slightly higher awareness of their surroundings.

There is no excuse, there should be a pilot scheme on all M'ways.

It would also be an 'advance' in driving to do this...

So the people who's powers of observation are so poor that they don't even look behind them will magically improve their observational powers?

Call me a cynic but I think they'd more than likely take the easy route and stay where they are. Which is pretty much their current thinking but under your proposal it'd be legitimate and Von could do NOTHING about it.

[Brother Mycroft]

naetype said:

Brother Mycroft said:

Keeping to the left is not stopped by overtaking on the left, far from it, with the knowledge that you can be most people will get over to the left as early as they can to avoid the additional hassle of looking around them more or if they drive conscientiously [as most people do] then such a measure wil actually firce them to have a slightly higher awareness of their surroundings.

There is no excuse, there should be a pilot scheme on all M'ways.

It would also be an 'advance' in driving to do this...

So the people who's powers of observation are so poor that they don't even look behind them will magically improve their observational powers?

Call me a cynic but I think they'd more than likely take the easy route and stay where they are. Which is pretty much their current thinking but under your proposal it'd be legitimate and Von could do NOTHING about it.

Some look some don't, those that don't are a lost cause, those that do will become aware that things have changed around them being undertaken will be novel and will raise awareness in of itself.

You cannot tar all drivers 'out there' in that overtaking lane [sic] as being myopic, some simply don't know how to use a motorway.

Those that do then use their greayer knowledge to great advantage.

Mr. Vonhosen can say what he likes, the plain fact that his advice is being ignored all over every motorway and to good effect.

I have only ever seen the police, the occasional moron and the chav being chased by the police undertake on anything other than motorways.

On the 3 lane motorway make it legal, everywhere else... nah, bad karma in that!

[waremark]

vonhosen said:

You think I'd be wrong, but I don't. C'est la vie.

Fair enough.

But do you think your colleagues actually do stop those who overtake on the left, while otherwise driving sensibly?

Indeed, you did not answer whether you yourself actually do so?

[Yung Man]

vonhosen said:

Leave me to deal with the lane hogger & I will.

Being a professional driver I've seen most things on my travels but never plod stopping someone for "lane hogging".
Can I ask you when was the last time you stopped anyone for "lane hogging"?, I would imagine more people get a tug for undertaking than LH.

[vonhosen]

waremark said:

vonhosen said:

You think I'd be wrong, but I don't. C'est la vie.

Fair enough.

But do you think your colleagues actually do stop those who overtake on the left, while otherwise driving sensibly?

Indeed, you did not answer whether you yourself actually do so?

I don't view undertaking as sensible driving.

I'd imagine you'd consider doing it, so you see nothing wrong in it.
I wouldn't do it & do see something wrong in it.

Do people get stopped by myself & others ?
Yes & invariably they are exceeding the limit when they do it as well, because the lane hogger is traveling close to, at, or even above the limit.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 9th October 07:05

[vonhosen]

Yung Man said:

vonhosen said:

Leave me to deal with the lane hogger & I will.

Being a professional driver I've seen most things on my travels but never plod stopping someone for "lane hogging".
Can I ask you when was the last time you stopped anyone for "lane hogging"?, I would imagine more people get a tug for undertaking than LH.

I regularly deal with people for poor lane discipline.
(Wasn't out & about the last couple of weeks much, but did the week before.)

How do you know what people have been stopped for when you drive by them ?

[CommanderJameson]

vonhosen said:

Yung Man said:

vonhosen said:

Leave me to deal with the lane hogger & I will.

Being a professional driver I've seen most things on my travels but never plod stopping someone for "lane hogging".
Can I ask you when was the last time you stopped anyone for "lane hogging"?, I would imagine more people get a tug for undertaking than LH.

I regularly deal with people for poor lane discipline.

Please patrol the A1M between Dishforth and South Mimms to the exclusion of all else!

(Or is that "regularly" in the same way that I "regularly" have a birthday? Did you mean "frequently"?)

[ST2]

Soon after the M1 was opened, c1959, there was a well publicised case of the then Duke of Bedford overtaking on the left a third lane hogger on an otherwise empty m-way in his Bentley.
DoB was reported by the 3rd lane hogger, and as a result charged with DWDCA and fined-I cannot remember if there was an endorsement.
Of course no action was taken against the hogger.
Because of the publicity of the case the then Head of Bedfordshire Traffic Police, Supt. Turton was asked on television, what should one do in these circumstances, and his reply was, "if they won't move over, go to lane 1 and pass on the left."

[vonhosen]

ST2 said:

Soon after the M1 was opened, c1959, there was a well publicised case of the then Duke of Bedford overtaking on the left a third lane hogger on an otherwise empty m-way in his Bentley.
DoB was reported by the 3rd lane hogger, and as a result charged with DWDCA and fined-I cannot remember if there was an endorsement.
Of course no action was taken against the hogger.
Because of the publicity of the case the then Head of Bedfordshire Traffic Police, Supt. Turton was asked on television, what should one do in these circumstances, and his reply was, "if they won't move over, go to lane 1 and pass on the left."

then someone else added that you can collect your fine & points just like the DoB did.

[Strangely Brown]

It's so refreshing to see that Von (amongst other BiB apparently) takes the sensible and practical approach to the situation.

Nuts to nicking the driver who is actually causing a genuine problem and is [arguably] committing the more clearly defined offence (obstruction) in favour of nicking the person who simply wants to get on with their day and has no other option but to OVERTAKE on the left and does so in complete safety having considered the likely actions of the 2hat.

[vonhosen]

Strangely Brown said:

It's so refreshing to see that Von (amongst other BiB apparently) takes the sensible and practical approach to the situation.

Nuts to nicking the driver who is actually causing a genuine problem and is [arguably] committing the more clearly defined offence (obstruction) in favour of nicking the person who simply wants to get on with their day and has no other option but to OVERTAKE on the left and does so in complete safety having considered the likely actions of the 2hat.

It's not obstruction. They would be dealt with for Sec 3 RTA, only the flipside of it to the person undertaking, that is without reasonable consideration. Though you'd be hard pressed to prove that where they were driving at the speed limit (because you shouldn't be going any quicker than that anyway) & these are most of the undertaking cases I see.

Simple fact is neither should be doing what they are doing, it's in contravention of the Highway code for both, it would probably cause both to fail on a driving test were it done on a DC. In short it's unacceptable driving behaviour. You can disagree with that, I don't mind, I'll deal with things as I see fit (as I'm charged with doing), not how you would do it if you had my job.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 9th October 18:56

[Strangely Brown]

vonhosen said:

It's not obstruction. They would be dealt with for Sec 3 RTA, only the flipside of it to the person undertaking, that is without reasonable consideration.

OK, fair enough but as I continually take the trouble to point out, the OVERTAKE on the nearside is only ever carried out after they have been given ample time to move, after they have been alerted to my presence and after I have made careful judgement of their likely actions. ONLY then do I OVERTAKE on the nearside. No matter how you spin it that is FAR from DWDCA. [Cue explanation of how the test is blah blah blah.... yawn] If it's dangerous in the circumstances that I describe then it's dangerous when done in queues and more so in one way streets and the US Freeways and Interstates would be total carnage. The simple fact of the matter is that if it is done properly then it is no more dangerous than OVERTAKING on the offside. You can argue it as much as you like but you won't change the facts.

vonhosen said:

Though you'd be hard pressed to prove that where they were driving at the speed limit (because you shouldn't be going any quicker than that anyway) & these are most of the undertaking cases I see.

Whilst that may be true in most cases it is by no means the overwhelming majority. I often find them travelling a good 10 or 20 mph UNDER the limit.

vonhosen said:

Simple fact is neither should be doing what they are doing, it's in contravention of the Highway code for both,

A contravention of the HC does not in itself constitute an offence. Yes, I understand that it can be used to establish culpability in the event of accident.

vonhosen said:

it would probably cause both to fail on a driving test were it done on a DC. In short it's unacceptable driving behaviour.

IMO it is unacceptable to be forced to sit behind people for mile after mile when they are either completely oblivious to the world around them or so pig-ignorant that they don't give a toss how their behaviour is affecting everyone behind them.

vonhosen said:

You can disagree with that, I don't mind,

I think we have already established that much.

vonhosen said:

I'll deal with things as I see fit (as I'm charged with doing)

Yes, it's nice to have a bit of power to use "as you see fit" isn't it. It's such a shame that you "see fit" as you do, but we've been there before haven't we.

vonhosen said:

not how you would do it if you had my job.

The difference being that at least I would tackle the problem, NOT the symptom. I certainly wouldn't be a mindless drone enforcing the law simply because it's the law. I'd like to think that I, at least, would be able to tell the difference between what is "illegal" and what is "wrong".

[Brother Mycroft]

vonhosen said:

Strangely Brown said:

It's so refreshing to see that Von (amongst other BiB apparently) takes the sensible and practical approach to the situation.

Nuts to nicking the driver who is actually causing a genuine problem and is [arguably] committing the more clearly defined offence (obstruction) in favour of nicking the person who simply wants to get on with their day and has no other option but to OVERTAKE on the left and does so in complete safety having considered the likely actions of the 2hat.

[1]It's not obstruction. They would be dealt with for Sec 3 RTA, only the flipside of it to [2] the person undertaking, that is without reasonable consideration. Though you'd be hard pressed to prove that where they were driving at the speed limit (because you shouldn't be going any quicker than that anyway) & these are most of the undertaking cases I see.

[3] Simple fact is neither should be doing what they are doing, it's in contravention of the Highway code for both, it would probably cause both to fail on a driving test were it done on a [4] DC. [5] In short it's unacceptable driving behaviour. You can disagree with that, I don't mind, [6] I'll deal with things as I see fit (as I'm charged with doing), not how you would do it if you had my job.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 9th October 18:56

1/. It most assuredly is if lane 3 is the overtaking lane, if they are not overtaking then they obstructing.

2/. No, usually the overtaking on the left is performed with very great caution, we check that there are no half-wits in uniform around to book us.

3/. No, it is not a simple fact, it is a particular point of law that the police force has made an issue rather than moving with the people it is charged to serve.

4/. On a DC is unacceptable, 3 lanes is the only place!

5/. It is only unacceptable to those that have forgotten the message and worship only the letter of the law.

6/. In short you will continue to exhibit a lack of common sense.

[R_U_LOCAL]

MLMs might be annoying, but in reality, they're not a priority for the Police. We've enough to do trying to remove the most dangerous and illegal drivers from the road.

I understand people's frustration with the MLMs, but my advice on page 1 of this thread still stands.

[Brother Mycroft]

R_U_LOCAL said:

MLMs might be annoying, but in reality, they're not a priority for the Police. We've enough to do trying to remove the most dangerous and illegal drivers from the road.

I understand people's frustration with the MLMs, but my advice on page 1 of this thread still stands.

It is bad advice, it does not improve the road skills of anyone and leads to frustration.

Things advanced driver are meant to avoid either in themselves or in others.

[R_U_LOCAL]

Brother Mycroft said:

R_U_LOCAL said:

MLMs might be annoying, but in reality, they're not a priority for the Police. We've enough to do trying to remove the most dangerous and illegal drivers from the road.

I understand people's frustration with the MLMs, but my advice on page 1 of this thread still stands.

It is bad advice, it does not improve the road skills of anyone and leads to frustration.

Things advanced driver are meant to avoid either in themselves or in others.

Please explain to me how "hang back and be patient" is bad advice.