NO OVERTAKING sign
Discussion
A white text on red background “NO OVERTAKING” sign has been put up next to roadworks near me. The road has been resurfaced and the white lines removed, including double white lines.
I wonder about the legality of these signs, are they enforceable?
This government information suggests that if a standard mandatory sign exists then it should be used, and NO OVERTAKING doesn’t feature in the examples given.
Why would you not use the red circle with black and red cars inside? That also enables drivers to be informed when the restriction ends.
Not looking for a debate about whether it is wise to obey these signs, overtaking through thick chippings is never advisable, but on their legal standing.
I wonder about the legality of these signs, are they enforceable?
This government information suggests that if a standard mandatory sign exists then it should be used, and NO OVERTAKING doesn’t feature in the examples given.
Why would you not use the red circle with black and red cars inside? That also enables drivers to be informed when the restriction ends.
Not looking for a debate about whether it is wise to obey these signs, overtaking through thick chippings is never advisable, but on their legal standing.
My opinion is that the sign is legal, assuming it complies with the regulation including being reflective.
Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
Schedule 12 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 20021 (TSRGD) (as amended) prescribes a number of miscellaneous warning, informatory and regulatory white on red signs for use at road and street works on the non-motorway network. The table below shows most of the legends prescribed there although it may not include every possible permitted combination.
(My bold, since "NO OVERTAKING" is not shown in the table.)Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
For situations that require temporary white on red signs not prescribed in Schedule 12 of the TSRGD, regulation 53 allows practitioners to create signs with legends tailored to the particular circumstances, subject to certain conditions. However, before creating a new sign, practitioners should first check Schedule 12 to see if a suitable sign already exists. In all cases, retroreflective sheeting must be used for both the red background and the white border and legend, in accordance with regulation 19(3). Unreflectorised signs are unlawful and difficult to read at night.
Super Sonic said:
lancslad58 said:
Legal
Legal to overtake? Legal to put up a sign?OP doesn't want a discussion.
It's a fairly pointless post, couldn't care it it's legal or not, common sense says don't overtake.
If the OP were that bothered he could do his own research on-line.
48k said:
My opinion is that the sign is legal, assuming it complies with the regulation including being reflective.
My view is that it is not legally enforceable since a pre-existing sign already exists to disallow overtaking which has not been used, therefore advisory only. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
Schedule 12 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 20021 (TSRGD) (as amended) prescribes a number of miscellaneous warning, informatory and regulatory white on red signs for use at road and street works on the non-motorway network. The table below shows most of the legends prescribed there although it may not include every possible permitted combination.
(My bold, since "NO OVERTAKING" is not shown in the table.)Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
For situations that require temporary white on red signs not prescribed in Schedule 12 of the TSRGD, regulation 53 allows practitioners to create signs with legends tailored to the particular circumstances, subject to certain conditions. However, before creating a new sign, practitioners should first check Schedule 12 to see if a suitable sign already exists. In all cases, retroreflective sheeting must be used for both the red background and the white border and legend, in accordance with regulation 19(3). Unreflectorised signs are unlawful and difficult to read at night.
These are used for temporary works-BUT also No Overtaking Sign is also used on permeant roads for One Way Routes.
Anything with a RED RING is Mandatory, pretty simples.
Micro-asphalt around my way is common to have no temp overtaking signs for the 14 days the stone is left lose to be 'drive in'. There will be a temp advisory 20mph Limit and it will be mandatory not to overtake due to the lose chippings making doing so hazardous.
Anything with a RED RING is Mandatory, pretty simples.
Micro-asphalt around my way is common to have no temp overtaking signs for the 14 days the stone is left lose to be 'drive in'. There will be a temp advisory 20mph Limit and it will be mandatory not to overtake due to the lose chippings making doing so hazardous.
Edited by James.Pond on Tuesday 3rd June 12:28
lancslad58 said:
If the OP were that bothered he could do his own research on-line.
I did research and came up with the link I posted in the OP. Despite listing many variants of recommended wording, "NO OVERTAKING" is not there. As I said, an easily recognisable standard sign exists that is mandatory and enables an end of restriction to be identified. Without an end indicator how do you know when the restriction ends? These signs are flexible and look like laminated paper, not metal and certainly not properly reflective.Thanks for all opinions.
MustangGT said:
48k said:
My opinion is that the sign is legal, assuming it complies with the regulation including being reflective.
My view is that it is not legally enforceable since a pre-existing sign already exists to disallow overtaking which has not been used, therefore advisory only. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
Schedule 12 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 20021 (TSRGD) (as amended) prescribes a number of miscellaneous warning, informatory and regulatory white on red signs for use at road and street works on the non-motorway network. The table below shows most of the legends prescribed there although it may not include every possible permitted combination.
(My bold, since "NO OVERTAKING" is not shown in the table.)Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
For situations that require temporary white on red signs not prescribed in Schedule 12 of the TSRGD, regulation 53 allows practitioners to create signs with legends tailored to the particular circumstances, subject to certain conditions. However, before creating a new sign, practitioners should first check Schedule 12 to see if a suitable sign already exists. In all cases, retroreflective sheeting must be used for both the red background and the white border and legend, in accordance with regulation 19(3). Unreflectorised signs are unlawful and difficult to read at night.
James.Pond said:
These are used for temporary works-BUT also No Overtaking Sign is also used on permeant roads for One Way Routes.
Anything with a RED RING is Mandatory, pretty simples...
'Simples' but wrong. Signs with a red ring are mostly prohibitory.Anything with a RED RING is Mandatory, pretty simples...
Edited by James.Pond on Tuesday 3rd June 12:28
Edited by Super Sonic on Tuesday 3rd June 13:45
48k said:
MustangGT said:
48k said:
My opinion is that the sign is legal, assuming it complies with the regulation including being reflective.
My view is that it is not legally enforceable since a pre-existing sign already exists to disallow overtaking which has not been used, therefore advisory only. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
Schedule 12 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 20021 (TSRGD) (as amended) prescribes a number of miscellaneous warning, informatory and regulatory white on red signs for use at road and street works on the non-motorway network. The table below shows most of the legends prescribed there although it may not include every possible permitted combination.
(My bold, since "NO OVERTAKING" is not shown in the table.)Traffic Advisory Leaflet 01/14 said:
For situations that require temporary white on red signs not prescribed in Schedule 12 of the TSRGD, regulation 53 allows practitioners to create signs with legends tailored to the particular circumstances, subject to certain conditions. However, before creating a new sign, practitioners should first check Schedule 12 to see if a suitable sign already exists. In all cases, retroreflective sheeting must be used for both the red background and the white border and legend, in accordance with regulation 19(3). Unreflectorised signs are unlawful and difficult to read at night.
This is what I consider to be a 'proper' white on red sign.
This is the sign that prompted the thread.
which, depending on the wind direction, presents as "O AKING", and even less visible text when driving past.
I missed this bit in the Government info; "Unreflectorised signs are unlawful and difficult to read at night." So these specific signs are definitely unlawful.
This is the sign that prompted the thread.
which, depending on the wind direction, presents as "O AKING", and even less visible text when driving past.
I missed this bit in the Government info; "Unreflectorised signs are unlawful and difficult to read at night." So these specific signs are definitely unlawful.
It could be an advisory sign, like some of the maximum speed signs you see, or the flashing 50mph signs above motorways , advisory but not mandatory. But failing to abide and then being involved in an RTC could go against you or be seen as a contributory factor
Edited by The Gauge on Tuesday 3rd June 20:53
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff