Double white lines - is it ever OK to cross them?

[GTP rpm]

Whilst on a work run in the company van, I came across a situation I'd not experienced before and did not know the answer.

On a 40mph zone, on a winding b-road I found myself behind a cyclist. Having been a keen cyclist before and a mo-ped owner, I'm very forgiving when passing bikes of any description and pride myself on doing the right thing.

The lane was quite narrow and with double white lines, I knew I could not cross and the width of the work van meant going side-by-side with the cyclist would be dangerous...

I slowed down to the speed of the cyclist and waited until a break in the double white lines to come up. After a good 2-3 minutes of continuous double whites and very, very impateint drivers behind I eventually got to a breif break in the lines - a turn off slip to the right!

I figured, it must be OK to cross the lines if there was an obstruction? But what do I deem an instruction...

No doubt it's written in black and white and you all know it, but I don't and yes, I could search for it but then if that's the case there will be nothing to talk about, ever!

Thanks in advance,

Ian

Edit;

Rule 129

You MUST NOT cross or straddle double white lines in normal driving. Exceptions are: if it is safe to do so and you need to enter premises adjoining the carriageway or a side road. In addition, it is permissible to cross the line as necessary and provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle. Or to overtake a horse, pedal cycle or road maintenance vehicle, only if they are not travelling at speeds greater than 16 km/h (10 mph). You can also cross double white lines when ordered to do so by a policeman in uniform.

Well, he was one of those blokes in lycra...doing around 16-18mph. I was right to follow, but by god it felt impossibly slow!

Edited by GTP rpm on Wednesday 5th May 01:22

[PeteG]

You can cross a solid white line system (doubles, or solid on your side) to pass a stationary vehicle, or to overtake a cyclist, horse, or road maintenance vehicle travelling at less than 10mph.

HTH

[streaky]

10 mph is an arbitrary limit.

Solid white lines used to be applied where there was an overtaking hazard (albeit, now seemingly sometimes used simply to prevent overtaking as a means to slowing traffic and causing inconvenience to the motorist).

I am sure all of us can easily think of roads where crossing a solid white line for the brief time necessary to overtake a cyclist travelling at 16mph is not a hazardous manoeuvre.

However, an offence is committed by so doing. Whether or not you are booked by an observing police officer is as likely to depend on which side of the bed they got out that morning, as on any other criterion.

Streaky

[Syd knee]

Section 5.4 of the traffic signs manual says Double white lines should not normaly be used where the carriageway is less than 6.1m wide. This is to give adequate space to pass a cyclist without contraveening the lines. Because it is an endorsible offence all continuouse white lines have to be agreed by the cheif constable.
near us we have double white lines and a sign that reads oncoming vehichles in the middle of the road.

[streaky]

^^^^^

And you think the CC (a) doesn't delegate this responsibility, and (b) gives a damn?

Where's the accountability?

Streaky

[Mr Gear]

It's only the road maintenance vehicle that has to be travelling at 10mph

[vonhosen]

Mr Gear said:

It's only the road maintenance vehicle that has to be travelling at 10mph

That's not correct.

You need to read The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002
Reg 26 (6) (e), (f) & (g)

[Mr Gear]

vonhosen said:

Mr Gear said:

It's only the road maintenance vehicle that has to be travelling at 10mph

That's not correct.

You need to read The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002
Reg 26 (6) (e), (f) & (g)

It's my "racing rules" interpretation. You should hear what racers come up with sometimes when it comes to comma placement and how that affects their responsibility to adhere to the rulebook!

[erdnase]

I smugly passed a cyclist yesterday by crossing unbroken white lines. It felt good - a little like stopping on a box junction whilst waiting to turn right

(Yes, I need to get out more!)

[bluepolarbear]

PeteG said:

You can cross a solid white line system (doubles, or solid on your side) to pass a stationary vehicle, or to overtake a cyclist, horse, or road maintenance vehicle travelling at less than 10mph.

HTH

DWL are do not cross, not do not overtake. Depending on the road you can can overtake anything providing you don't cross the DWL.

[SS2.]

Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 said:

26. Double white lines

(2) The requirements conveyed by a road marking mentioned in paragraph (1) shall be that—

(b) subject to paragraph (6), every vehicle proceeding on any length of road along which the marking has been so placed that, as viewed in the direction of travel of the vehicle, a continuous line is on the left of a broken line or of another continuous line, shall be so driven as to keep the first-mentioned continuous line on the right hand or off side of the vehicle.

<..snip..>

(6) Nothing in paragraph (2)(b) shall be taken to prohibit a vehicle from being driven across, or so as to straddle, the continuous line referred to in that paragraph, if it is safe to do so and if necessary to do so—

(a) to enable the vehicle to enter, from the side of the road on which it is proceeding, land or premises adjacent to the length of road on which the line is placed, or another road joining that road;
(b) in order to pass a stationary vehicle;
(c) owing to circumstances outside the control of the driver;
(d) in order to avoid an accident;
(e) in order to pass a road maintenance vehicle which is in use, is moving at a speed not exceeding 10 mph, and is displaying to the rear the sign shown in diagram 610 or 7403;
(f) in order to pass a pedal cycle moving at a speed not exceeding 10 mph;
(g) in order to pass a horse that is being ridden or led at a speed not exceeding 10 mph; or
(h) for the purposes of complying with any direction of a constable in uniform or a traffic warden.

[cs02rm0]

I've broken that rule twice today then.

[streaky]

"Double white lines" do not mean 'do not cross'.

A solid white line on the side nearest the driver means 'do not cross'.

Streaky

[streaky]

Mr Gear said:

vonhosen said:

Mr Gear said:

It's only the road maintenance vehicle that has to be travelling at 10mph

That's not correct.

You need to read The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002
Reg 26 (6) (e), (f) & (g)

It's my "racing rules" interpretation. You should hear what racers come up with sometimes when it comes to comma placement and how that affects their responsibility to adhere to the rulebook!

The rules of English grammar are long-established (and were taught in my day at school). Streaky

[tigger1]

GTP rpm said:

Well, he was one of those blokes in lycra...doing around 16-18mph. I was right to follow, but by god it felt impossibly slow!

16mph on a bike, I would hardly be pedalling...lycra or no lycra, and that's on a mountain bike. 20mph on the flat is easily maintainable.

That said, I have people passing me on a road near home regularly with double white lines (that they cross to pass me) even though I'll be doing almost 30mph (sometimes slightly more) on my bike - in a 30 limit.

[Scraggles]

overtake cyclists a lot on double white lines, but only when it looks safe to do so

[Puddenchucker]

Scraggles said:

overtake cyclists a lot on double white lines, but only when it looks safe to do so

Which is why the law needs changing (IMHO) now that double white lines are becoming much more prevalant (usually for politically correct reasons rather than safety).
The law should be that you may overtake cyclists and, on roads with 40+mph limits, mopeds and slow moving (say < 25mph) agricultural vehicles if it is safe to do so.

[tigger1]

Puddenchucker said:

Scraggles said:

overtake cyclists a lot on double white lines, but only when it looks safe to do so

Which is why the law needs changing (IMHO) now that double white lines are becoming much more prevalant (usually for politically correct reasons rather than safety).
The law should be that you may overtake cyclists and, on roads with 40+mph limits, mopeds and slow moving (say < 25mph) agricultural vehicles if it is safe to do so.

No, the law is fine - the unnecessary application of more (and lengthier) double-white lines ([off-topic] and 50mph speed limits[/off-topic]) is what is wrong here.

[Scraggles]

never knew there was a speed limit that should be checking for when overtaking something slow moving, only as long as it feels and looks safe is my criteria

[Vipers]

streaky said:

10 mph is an arbitrary limit.

Solid white lines used to be applied where there was an overtaking hazard (albeit, now seemingly sometimes used simply to prevent overtaking as a means to slowing traffic and causing inconvenience to the motorist).

I am sure all of us can easily think of roads where crossing a solid white line for the brief time necessary to overtake a cyclist travelling at 16mph is not a hazardous manoeuvre.

However, an offence is committed by so doing. Whether or not you are booked by an observing police officer is as likely to depend on which side of the bed they got out that morning, as on any other criterion.

Streaky

As I was passing said cyclist your woship, he suddenly gunned it, would that get you off the hook?