Can you cross double white lines to pass a bus at its stop?

[jondude]

Was driving on unknown roads in Cheshire today and as I came around a corner a bus had stopped to pick up passengers. There were double white lines continuing past the bus for about 20 or so yards. Was tempting to overtake but I held back - only for 3 local drivers to overtake both my car and the bus, the last driver almost clipping the bus as it pulled away.

I know you are allowed to pass a stationary vehicle despite double whites but presumed and still presume a bus dropping off and picking up passengers is not considered 'stationary' in these circumstances?

Or can I follow the others here and overtake the bus?

[TOPTON]

Sarcastic response but needed I feel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Have you passed a driving test??

The bus IS stationary, how can you possibly think otherwise!!!

[Moonhawk]

jondude said:

I know you are allowed to pass a stationary vehicle despite double whites but presumed and still presume a bus dropping off and picking up passengers is not considered 'stationary' in these circumstances?

If the bus is not moving - it is considered stationary - regardless of the reason it isn't moving. You should have overtaken if it was safe to do so as per highway code rule 129.

[Nigel Worc's]

You may cross a double white, if safe to do so, in those circumstances.

You can't however go to the right of a keep left arrow, if one is present on a ped refuge for example, which councils have a habit of putting alongside bus stops, even if it is safe to do so, you have to wait behind the bus forever.

[Boosted LS1]

Am i correct in thinking you can overtake slow moving traffic also, ie pushbikes, milk floats, horses and old codgers who can't get above 5 mph? I overtake them all.

[softtop]

Boosted LS1 said:

Am i correct in thinking you can overtake slow moving traffic also, ie pushbikes, milk floats, horses and old codgers who can't get above 5 mph? I overtake them all.

You can pass more now, their speed can be 10mph.


https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-rider...

[jondude]

Thanks all -appreciated.

[turbobloke]

softtop said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Am i correct in thinking you can overtake slow moving traffic also, ie pushbikes, milk floats, horses and old codgers who can't get above 5 mph? I overtake them all.

You can pass more now, their speed can be 10mph.

https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-rider...

It's common sense but you'd think the above would also include 'to avoid a collision' in the sense that crossing the line(s) would not cause another to replace the one avoided.

[Red Devil]

softtop said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Am i correct in thinking you can overtake slow moving traffic also, ie pushbikes, milk floats, horses and old codgers who can't get above 5 mph? I overtake them all.

You can pass more now, their speed can be 10mph.


https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-rider...

The old codger still needs to riding a pushbike, driving a road maintenance vehicle, or on horse back though. Contrary to popular opinion the legislation makes no mention of milk floats: TSRGD 2002 Section 26(6) - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regul...

So if he/she is driving one of those or their Prius at >10mph you'll still be committing an offence. The only get out is if you're trying to avoid an accident. That might be somewhat difficult to prove though.

[p1esk]

I'd prefer the double white line system to be dispensed with completely. In my view it is often incorrectly applied, so I'd rather they didn't bother.

I frequently see situations where:

a) the linework indicates that an overtake could be acceptable, or

b) overtaking is forbidden, even though it would be safe in the circumstances prevailing at this time.

IMHO the system is not reliable enough to deserve respect.

[eldar]

Red Devil said:

The only get out is if you're trying to avoid an accident. That might be somewhat difficult to prove though.

Easy to prove. Was there an accident? No, so I successfully avoided one.

[4rephill]

p1esk said:

I'd prefer the double white line system to be dispensed with completely. In my view it is often incorrectly applied, so I'd rather they didn't bother.

I frequently see situations where:

a) the linework indicates that an overtake could be acceptable, or

b) overtaking is forbidden, even though it would be safe in the circumstances prevailing at this time.

IMHO the system is not reliable enough to deserve respect.

So having no system at all would improve things? - I seriously doubt it!

People already perform overtakes in stupid, unsuitable places, taking away the solid white lines would just give them more freedom to perform dangerous overtakes.

A lot of roads have been re-assessed in recent years and previous sections that were decreed acceptable for overtaking on now have solid white lines to prevent overtaking. In many cases these lines have been introduced due to accidents on that stretch of road during overtaking manoeuvres.

The other advantage of solid white lines is that it can act as a heads up to a possibly dangerous situation ahead and give drivers a chance to apply more caution than they might have thought was required - Especially on a road they don't know.

Basically, people cannot be trusted to be left to make their own assessment as to whether it's safe to overtake or not on certain sections of roads.

Take away the solid white lines and chances are there'd be carnage on the roads! (The majority of which would be young lads who think they know better and can overtake wherever they like!)

[BertBert]

p1esk said:

I'd prefer the double white line system to be dispensed with completely. In my view it is often incorrectly applied, so I'd rather they didn't bother.

I frequently see situations where:

a) the linework indicates that an overtake could be acceptable, or

b) overtaking is forbidden, even though it would be safe in the circumstances prevailing at this time.

IMHO the system is not reliable enough to deserve respect.

This is an interesting philosophical view. (Just musing not having a go) It goes along with thoughts on speed limits.

What I mean is there seems to be a perspective of the need for absolutes. The double white line system must be perfect absolutely indicating unsafe places to overtake and the lack of them indicating potentially safe places to overtake.

Same for speed limits. Somehow they are supposed to indicate the absolute safety of the speed on the stick.

Then if they don't do that they are unfit for purpose.

But that's incorrect thinking. They are risk management/reduction measures. Not absolutes that apply exactly, correctly to the letter to each and every solution.

If we were all really skilled drivers, took note of all the inputs, drove conservatively, weren't unconsciously incompetent, didn't have egos, were ultra concerned about others, then the risk reduction measures could all be advisory, just information to help make the driving decisions.

But are are not, hence they have punishments attached. This gives the incorrect illusion that they are absolutes.

Bert

[Dr Jekyll]

4rephill said:

So having no system at all would improve things? - I seriously doubt it!

People already perform overtakes in stupid, unsuitable places, taking away the solid white lines would just give them more freedom to perform dangerous overtakes.

A lot of roads have been re-assessed in recent years and previous sections that were decreed acceptable for overtaking on now have solid white lines to prevent overtaking. In many cases these lines have been introduced due to accidents on that stretch of road during overtaking manoeuvres.

The other advantage of solid white lines is that it can act as a heads up to a possibly dangerous situation ahead and give drivers a chance to apply more caution than they might have thought was required - Especially on a road they don't know.

Basically, people cannot be trusted to be left to make their own assessment as to whether it's safe to overtake or not on certain sections of roads.

Take away the solid white lines and chances are there'd be carnage on the roads! (The majority of which would be young lads who think they know better and can overtake wherever they like!)

First of all, since when did solid whit lines prohibit overtaking?

Secondly, yobs who think they know better and can overtake anywhere they like are hardly going to take any notice of legal restrictions.

Thirdly, just because someone has managed to have an overtaking accident on a particular stretch of road doesn't mean it's always a bad place to overtake. It's perfectly possible to make an incompetent overtaking attempt in a location which is not in itself unsuitable. In fact suitable overtaking locations may well see more overtaking accidents and prohibiting overtakes there could well just move overtakes to less suitable locations. Prohibit overtaking where it is highly unlikely to be safe, fine, but not just where someone has got it wrong. By that logic we ban reversing in car parks because they are obviously dangerous places to reverse.

[davepoth]

The problem (and it's referred to in the regulations) is that excess use of double white lines in places where it's probably fine to overtake if you are sensible makes people think that they aren't a safety thing, just an annoying thing. That makes more people into "yobs" who would overtake on a double white line.

[lbc]

Nigel Worc's said:

You can't however go to the right of a keep left arrow, if one is present on a ped refuge for example, which councils have a habit of putting alongside bus stops, even if it is safe to do so, you have to wait behind the bus forever.

I am sure you are wrong about this.

[Sheepshanks]

lbc said:

Nigel Worc's said:

You can't however go to the right of a keep left arrow, if one is present on a ped refuge for example, which councils have a habit of putting alongside bus stops, even if it is safe to do so, you have to wait behind the bus forever.

I am sure you are wrong about this.

No he's not. For clarity, as the thread is about solid white lines, he means the one on a sign, not painted on the road.

[BertBert]

Sheepshanks said:

For clarity, as the thread is about solid white lines, he means the one on a sign, not painted on the road.

ahh that sign, now I understand! I was stuck thinking about lines on the road.
Bert

[lbc]

Sheepshanks said:

No he's not.... he means the one on a sign..

I know he refers to the blue keep left signs...

If there is an obstruction there, do I therefore wait there for a few hours or days until the obstruction has cleared.

[Sheepshanks]

lbc said:

If there is an obstruction there, do I therefore wait there for a few hours or days until the obstruction has cleared.

Strictly speaking, yes. Or until a police officer direct you around the sign.

Same as a stuck traffic light.