Undertaking on the approach to a roundabout
Discussion
Depends if it's obvious they could only be turning right.
If you can't see far enough down the road to be sure they're not moving into the RH lane to overtake a cyclist or let a vehicle out of a layby or some other thing, that might be 'careless', IMHO.
If you wanted the RH lane yourself, it's more naughty than careless....
If you can't see far enough down the road to be sure they're not moving into the RH lane to overtake a cyclist or let a vehicle out of a layby or some other thing, that might be 'careless', IMHO.
If you wanted the RH lane yourself, it's more naughty than careless....
For an HGV, I would probably leave it the space of both lanes whether turning right or not (depends on road width, layout etc.), he may need it to get the 'swing' - I would never put myself into a potentially dangerous position aside a large truck, there's only one loser if it goes wrong.
catso said:
For an HGV, I would probably leave it the space of both lanes whether turning right or not (depends on road width, layout etc.), he may need it to get the 'swing' - I would never put myself into a potentially dangerous position aside a large truck, there's only one loser if it goes wrong.
Is what I would do. Drive a Class 2 as y day job and the amount of times I see drivers undertake me or trucks in front of me when we are turning right and then put themselves directly in the danger zone (especially for artics and trailers that have long overhangs) is unreal. A truck can obliterate a car without much issue even in low speed accidents so it's best to just give them room and be delayed by 30 seconds than end up being delayed permanently.Just looked at your street view and it's plain they were heading right to the test area but if you didn't know that then they could as easily have been giving the trailer enough room to swing into the lane at right angles in the left as you approach the roundabout.
Edited by aterribleusername on Saturday 21st January 16:50
catso said:
For an HGV, I would probably leave it the space of both lanes whether turning right or not (depends on road width, layout etc.), he may need it to get the 'swing' - I would never put myself into a potentially dangerous position aside a large truck, there's only one loser if it goes wrong.
Agreed. OP’s statement of ‘I figured’ is not really enough, tbh. There was room for doubt it seems, so hold back.As an aside, it always baffles me why some people will boot it to get alongside a car that was in front of them on the single lane bit when a road splits into two lanes for a roundabout- I see so many people drifting out of their lanes on roundabouts and their approaches/exits that it's just asking for trouble.
However, looking at that street view it'sclear that this isn't one of those situations and I'm sure you'll be absolutely fine OP.
However, looking at that street view it'sclear that this isn't one of those situations and I'm sure you'll be absolutely fine OP.
Boo-urns said:
I was driving behind an HGV following a DVSA officer with one of those 'HGV Follow Me' signs on the top of his car today. They were doing about 40mph, at a guess, in the outside lane of a short length of dual carriageway.
The road switches from single carriageway to two-lane dual carriageway roughly 1/2 mile before the roundabout and the DVSA car and HGV moved immediately to the outside lane. After holding back in the inside lane for about 200 yards I figured they were turning right at the roundabout to get on the M3 and that it would be safe to overtake both on the left as I was taking the first exit at the roundabout. I don't think they were indicating at the point I overtook.
Here's a street view of the scene: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0557315,-1.2934124...
Now, I was always under the assumption that as 'undertaking' isn't a specific offence, there would be no issue with this move. However, a quick check online suggests that plod could view this as careless driving.
And given that I was overtaking a DVSA officer, is it likely that this will come back to bite me?
Almost certainly. I would be surprised if they didn’t write a full report on the incident as soon as they arrived at their destination and will submit this to the police providing they are able to find an officer in the next few weeks who isn’t raping or murdering someone.The road switches from single carriageway to two-lane dual carriageway roughly 1/2 mile before the roundabout and the DVSA car and HGV moved immediately to the outside lane. After holding back in the inside lane for about 200 yards I figured they were turning right at the roundabout to get on the M3 and that it would be safe to overtake both on the left as I was taking the first exit at the roundabout. I don't think they were indicating at the point I overtook.
Here's a street view of the scene: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0557315,-1.2934124...
Now, I was always under the assumption that as 'undertaking' isn't a specific offence, there would be no issue with this move. However, a quick check online suggests that plod could view this as careless driving.
And given that I was overtaking a DVSA officer, is it likely that this will come back to bite me?
blank said:
Sounds perfectly fine.
If you tried to avoid this manoeuvre every time it happened in Milton Keynes you wouldn't get far!
Ah, Milton Keynes. A short stretch of the A4146 when heading from Winslow direction cycling Oxford-Cambridge. the timing of getting into the right hand lane of an NSL dual carriageway is always a balancing act when you're doing 25-30 mph!If you tried to avoid this manoeuvre every time it happened in Milton Keynes you wouldn't get far!
Certainly didn't mind being undertaken, I was turning right.
Hammersia said:
Prison is too good for you OP
Why?The way I see this is that the left lane, i.e. the correct lane, was chosen by the driver to turn left. A slower moving vehicle was present in the right lane. By the time the roundabout had been reached, the vehicles were not side by side, so the point of leaving enough room for the HGV to turn is not really applicable.
I think the problem here is the use of the word undertaking, as that isn't really what happened. It implies that the intention was to pass the HGV to get ahead.
Solocle said:
blank said:
Sounds perfectly fine.
If you tried to avoid this manoeuvre every time it happened in Milton Keynes you wouldn't get far!
Ah, Milton Keynes. A short stretch of the A4146 when heading from Winslow direction cycling Oxford-Cambridge. the timing of getting into the right hand lane of an NSL dual carriageway is always a balancing act when you're doing 25-30 mph!If you tried to avoid this manoeuvre every time it happened in Milton Keynes you wouldn't get far!
Certainly didn't mind being undertaken, I was turning right.
catso said:
For an HGV, I would probably leave it the space of both lanes whether turning right or not (depends on road width, layout etc.), he may need it to get the 'swing' - I would never put myself into a potentially dangerous position aside a large truck, there's only one loser if it goes wrong.
Just out of interest, and from an insurance/blame point of view, what would happen if a car was sideswiped by a HGV or HGV Trailer simply because it was in the lane next to it?I have always presumed that it would be deemed the HGV’s fault. At the end of the day, if their vehicle leaves the confines of their lane and hits another vehicle, it can’t be anyone else’s fault surely?
Lord Marylebone said:
Just out of interest, and from an insurance/blame point of view, what would happen if a car was sideswiped by a HGV or HGV Trailer simply because it was in the lane next to it?
I have always presumed that it would be deemed the HGV’s fault. At the end of the day, if their vehicle leaves the confines of their lane and hits another vehicle, it can’t be anyone else’s fault surely?
It would be the HGV drivers fault in most cases. Exceptions being where someone drove in to a gap that was clearly going to close. However, if we need to use two lanes we're trained to straddle both lanes. Even doing that though there are some chancers, but the HGV driver should be constantly checking their mirrors and come to a complete stop when that happens.I have always presumed that it would be deemed the HGV’s fault. At the end of the day, if their vehicle leaves the confines of their lane and hits another vehicle, it can’t be anyone else’s fault surely?
In this particular example I can't see where the HGV driver would have to use two lanes, except for the approach to the roundabout up ahead where it opens to three wide. It looks too tight to only use lane three, so straddling lanes two and three should be clear to everyone that they're taking up the space required.
DaveE87 said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Just out of interest, and from an insurance/blame point of view, what would happen if a car was sideswiped by a HGV or HGV Trailer simply because it was in the lane next to it?
I have always presumed that it would be deemed the HGV’s fault. At the end of the day, if their vehicle leaves the confines of their lane and hits another vehicle, it can’t be anyone else’s fault surely?
It would be the HGV drivers fault in most cases. Exceptions being where someone drove in to a gap that was clearly going to close. However, if we need to use two lanes we're trained to straddle both lanes. Even doing that though there are some chancers, but the HGV driver should be constantly checking their mirrors and come to a complete stop when that happens.I have always presumed that it would be deemed the HGV’s fault. At the end of the day, if their vehicle leaves the confines of their lane and hits another vehicle, it can’t be anyone else’s fault surely?
In this particular example I can't see where the HGV driver would have to use two lanes, except for the approach to the roundabout up ahead where it opens to three wide. It looks too tight to only use lane three, so straddling lanes two and three should be clear to everyone that they're taking up the space required.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff