No overtaking sign vs solid lines
No overtaking sign vs solid lines
Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

74 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Yesterday whilst trying to avoid the M40 closure, I found myself on a stretch of road approaching a nasty brow that completely obliterated visibility.

However, there were no solid white lines in the centre of the road, but there was a "No overtaking" sign.
vs.

This started me wondering... What is the difference between a solid white line in the centre of the road (either double, or just on "your" side of the road) and a no overtaking sign? What are the reasons for having one as opposed to the other?

madcop

6,649 posts

283 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
LexSport said:
Yesterday whilst trying to avoid the M40 closure, I found myself on a stretch of road approaching a nasty brow that completely obliterated visibility.

However, there were no solid white lines in the centre of the road, but there was a "No overtaking" sign.
vs.

This started me wondering... What is the difference between a solid white line in the centre of the road (either double, or just on "your" side of the road) and a no overtaking sign? What are the reasons for having one as opposed to the other?


I cant tell you the reasons why there is one as opposed to the other. I can tell you they both mean exactly the same and have the same penalty if you fail to comply with them. £60 and 3 points if seen by Police, if disaster happens, a lot more as well!

porsche944

36 posts

267 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Quite possibly one of cost - much easier (and cheaper) to put a sign up than to cause a bit of chaos and spend more money in painting the lines.

hertsbiker

6,443 posts

291 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
as the sign only has cars, does htat mean bikes are ok???!

Bassfiend

5,530 posts

270 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
madcop said:

I cant tell you the reasons why there is one as opposed to the other. I can tell you they both mean exactly the same and have the same penalty if you fail to comply with them. £60 and 3 points if seen by Police, if disaster happens, a lot more as well!


I always thought that a "No Overtaking" sign meant *EXACTLY* that - NO OVERTAKING, period. Whereas a solid white line meant that you could overtake as long as you didn't cross the white line?

Phil

streaky

19,311 posts

269 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Bassfiend said:
I always thought that a "No Overtaking" sign meant *EXACTLY* that - NO OVERTAKING, period. Whereas a solid white line meant that you could overtake as long as you didn't cross the white line?

Phil
That was my understanding too - Streaky

chrisgr31

14,176 posts

275 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Aren't there also rules regarding visibility and double white lines?

Aren' double white lines only permitted when the visibility is less than x yards? Don't know what x is!

I thought this is why in some accident blackspots they used cross hatching surrounding by broken white lines.

So could the No Overtaking signs have different rules regarding visibility?

PetrolTed

34,461 posts

323 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Didn't BobTheBench say a while back that it's not illegal to cross solid white lines. I'm sure he said that there's no specific offence for crossing a solid line.

spnracing

1,554 posts

291 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
The Highway Code says;

Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10mph or less.
Laws RTA sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26

wanty1974

3,704 posts

268 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
... whereas the red circle sign simply means 'No Overtaking' which is perhaps more severe than the white lines....

icamm

2,153 posts

280 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
I think bassfiend has got it.

There is nothing that says you cannot overtake in a double white line section just that you MUST NOT break the line. This effectively means no overtaking for most vehicles but can be done on a bike with a wide lane and friendly traffic . Common perception of this line is that it means no overtaking.

The no overtaking sign specifically states what you cannot do.

icamm

2,153 posts

280 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Oh and for those that want a good read about all this stuff try www.highwaycode.gov.uk/

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

74 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Well, in the absence of anything else, I think this must be it. Interesting to see that it's not all that well known.

If anyone's interested, the Highway code, as far as I can tell, just says that the sign means "No overtaking". The Road Traffic Act 1988 makes it illegal to disobey it and the TSRGD has diagram 632 that specifies the sign, and other paragraphs that detail what other signs it can be displayed in conjuction with.

Other than it's definition as meaning "No overtaking", I cannot find anything else that explicitly covers it.

As a silly comment, on the piece of road that prompted me to start this thread, there was a single, broken white line in the centre of the road on the run up to a brow. As far as I can tell, I wouldn't have been allowed to overtake, but because of the absence of a solid white line, I could have driven all the way up to the brow straddling both carriageways.

PetrolTed

34,461 posts

323 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Err... Highway code isn't law though is it? I'll dig out BobTheBench's comment if I can...

oyster

13,340 posts

268 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
Does that mean under a no-overtaking sign, that you cannot overtake cyclists, horses and milk floats?

Bassfiend

5,530 posts

270 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
I always like the white line markings on the uphill section of the Alresford bypass section of the A31 heading towards Ropley ... confuses the f**k out of people does that!!!

Phil

spnracing

1,554 posts

291 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
PetrolTed said:
Err... Highway code isn't law though is it? I'll dig out BobTheBench's comment if I can...


Where the Highway Code uses the word 'MUST' I think it generally means that that is covered in the Road Traffic Act.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

74 months

Friday 12th September 2003
quotequote all
PetrolTed said:
Err... Highway code isn't law though is it? I'll dig out BobTheBench's comment if I can...

No, it's not. But many of the rules in the Highway code are backed up with a pointer to the legislation that makes it so.