A safe overtake, but against the highway code, opinions
Discussion
I was driving home the other night at about 11pm having played badminton, I was in no particular rush but would rather not be held up unnecessarily.
I'd been stuck behind a car doing consistently 15mph slower than could be done safely on that road and slowing down excessively for corners. Having been behind this car for about 4 1/2 miles we come to a 3/4mile straight, its downhill with 2 lanes coming up the hill, and double white lines (solid on near side).
You can probably see where I'm going with this. There are no junctions for half a mile or so, the only other car in sight is behind me, matching speed. I overtake safely, crossing the solid white line. Once I'm passed I get headlights and horn treatment from the car infront, it doesn't bother me and I shrug it off.
The question is, should I have overtaken? I know it was perfectly safe given the situation, despite going against the highway code, but its nagging my consious. I suppose I'm looking for constructive critisism, should I have stuck behind for the 4 miles or so of the journey left, or would others have done the same?
I'd been stuck behind a car doing consistently 15mph slower than could be done safely on that road and slowing down excessively for corners. Having been behind this car for about 4 1/2 miles we come to a 3/4mile straight, its downhill with 2 lanes coming up the hill, and double white lines (solid on near side).
You can probably see where I'm going with this. There are no junctions for half a mile or so, the only other car in sight is behind me, matching speed. I overtake safely, crossing the solid white line. Once I'm passed I get headlights and horn treatment from the car infront, it doesn't bother me and I shrug it off.
The question is, should I have overtaken? I know it was perfectly safe given the situation, despite going against the highway code, but its nagging my consious. I suppose I'm looking for constructive critisism, should I have stuck behind for the 4 miles or so of the journey left, or would others have done the same?
vonhosen said:
No you shouldn't have overtaken.
You say 15mph safer than safely could have been done in your opinion. Was that 15mph below the speed limit ?
You say 15mph safer than safely could have been done in your opinion. Was that 15mph below the speed limit ?
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 17th February 22:37
So, was a fairly bendy NSL A road, under good conditions in places 60mph is safe, for the majority of it 45-50 is about right, theres absolutely no need to be hitting 20mph in the corners though.
Theres nothing wrong capri's... hugh_ said:
vonhosen said:
No you shouldn't have overtaken.
You say 15mph safer than safely could have been done in your opinion. Was that 15mph below the speed limit ?
You say 15mph safer than safely could have been done in your opinion. Was that 15mph below the speed limit ?
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 17th February 22:37
So, was a fairly bendy NSL A road, under good conditions in places 60mph is safe, for the majority of it 45-50 is about right, theres absolutely no need to be hitting 20mph in the corners though.
Well no you shouldn't have overtaken against the solid white line & I personally would have reported you for the offence if I'd witnessed it. Never know you still might get reported for it.
vonhosen said:
Well no you shouldn't have overtaken against the solid white line & I personally would have reported you for the offence if I'd witnessed it. Never know you still might get reported for it.
If I do get reported then I will obviously be honest about the situation, getting reported was a chance I took. I didn't expect a safe overtake to bother me though, I suspect it's because the other driver was obviously displeased that I had overtaken.
hugh_ said:
vonhosen said:
Well no you shouldn't have overtaken against the solid white line & I personally would have reported you for the offence if I'd witnessed it. Never know you still might get reported for it.
If I do get reported then I will obviously be honest about the situation, getting reported was a chance I took. I didn't expect a safe overtake to bother me though, I suspect it's because the other driver was obviously displeased that I had overtaken.
What one person views as safe another may not.
Safe or not it was illegal & not just against the highway code.
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 17th February 22:51
vonhosen said:
hugh_ said:
vonhosen said:
Well no you shouldn't have overtaken against the solid white line & I personally would have reported you for the offence if I'd witnessed it. Never know you still might get reported for it.
If I do get reported then I will obviously be honest about the situation, getting reported was a chance I took. I didn't expect a safe overtake to bother me though, I suspect it's because the other driver was obviously displeased that I had overtaken.
What one person views as safe another may not.
Hence why I was asking other people's views on this given sitation, thank you for your opinion.
hugh_ said:
vonhosen said:
hugh_ said:
vonhosen said:
Well no you shouldn't have overtaken against the solid white line & I personally would have reported you for the offence if I'd witnessed it. Never know you still might get reported for it.
If I do get reported then I will obviously be honest about the situation, getting reported was a chance I took. I didn't expect a safe overtake to bother me though, I suspect it's because the other driver was obviously displeased that I had overtaken.
What one person views as safe another may not.
Hence why I was asking other people's views on this given sitation, thank you for your opinion.
Like I said though, it's not just a question of safe or not, there's the legality of it.
Two lanes for an uphill stretch, and One downhill,
pretty common layout where cars might need to pass slow moving
trucks dragging up hill,
not to say I've not done a 'Hugh' myself given similar circumstances
and just like Hugh, its the culmination of following an overly cautious
driver for some time, and with a car following me with probably the same intent, which is always on my mind when I look to illegally overtake
(has he already pulled out across that Line before me ?)
pretty common layout where cars might need to pass slow moving
trucks dragging up hill,
not to say I've not done a 'Hugh' myself given similar circumstances
and just like Hugh, its the culmination of following an overly cautious
driver for some time, and with a car following me with probably the same intent, which is always on my mind when I look to illegally overtake
(has he already pulled out across that Line before me ?)
agent006 said:
Perhaps the council should review the road markings on that stretch if it's possible to execute a safe overtake where the markings prevent it.
Yes, I think that's what should happen.
In legal terms the OP was clearly wrong to do the overtake, but in fact it was entirely safe, and I would almost certainly have done what he did.
I must say I intensely dislike the double white line system, not only because it often prevents overtakes that one could do perfectly safely, but because I also see many areas where an overtake would be 'allowed' but IMHO it would not be safe. If I knew how to post photographs on here I could produce numerous examples of this.
In the case described by the OP, what would have made more sense would be to have the linework arranged to permit a downhill driver to overtake (as he did) where the middle lane is not being used by somebody driving up the hill.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
agent006 said:
Perhaps the council should review the road markings on that stretch if it's possible to execute a safe overtake where the markings prevent it.
Yes, I think that's what should happen.
In legal terms the OP was clearly wrong to do the overtake, but in fact it was entirely safe, and I would almost certainly have done what he did.
I must say I intensely dislike the double white line system, not only because it often prevents overtakes that one could do perfectly safely, but because I also see many areas where an overtake would be 'allowed' but IMHO it would not be safe. If I knew how to post photographs on here I could produce numerous examples of this.
In the case described by the OP, what would have made more sense would be to have the linework arranged to permit a downhill driver to overtake (as he did) where the middle lane is not being used by somebody driving up the hill.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
But should it happen ?
Just because a skilled driver can safely overtake in one set of circumstances there, yet the layout is such that there is an unacceptably high chance of the less skilled making errors of judgement there, should the lines be removed ?
I think not, they are there for what we could expect of our mass of middle ground drivers.
The lines are placed there for a variety reasons, such as sight lines leading to an unaccetably high potential for mistakes, not because every overtake would actually be dangerous. They are there & so is the punishment, to encourage you not to take risks that are unacceptably high to society, in actions that involve the safety of others not just yourself.
The fact that one person safely completed an overtake (only in their opinion of course, as we also have someone else who seems to be voicing a counter opinion in this case), it does not mean that it is acceptable for all.
We seem to be having "suicide lanes" designed out, perhaps because drivers keep wrongly assuming the lane is theirs & they have greater priority to it than an overtaker in the opposite direction.
Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 18th February 11:30
I am surprised that there has not yet been any support for VH on this one. I would never plan to cross a solid line to overtake - it's one of those things I don't do because the law says I shouldn't. Would you go through a red traffic light just because you thought it was safe?
Incidentally, since this driver was so slow wasn't it possible to pass him safely before or after the solid line?
As to whether the line system could have been better designed, it sounds as though a line system giving priority to uphill traffic but allowing overtaking downhill if uphill traffic was not using the centre lane would have been better. That sort of system is safer than the older 'suicide' 3 lane system where there was no priority for use of the centre lane. But I would never expect an individual intelligent suggestion to influence the officials who decide on such things.
Incidentally, since this driver was so slow wasn't it possible to pass him safely before or after the solid line?
As to whether the line system could have been better designed, it sounds as though a line system giving priority to uphill traffic but allowing overtaking downhill if uphill traffic was not using the centre lane would have been better. That sort of system is safer than the older 'suicide' 3 lane system where there was no priority for use of the centre lane. But I would never expect an individual intelligent suggestion to influence the officials who decide on such things.
waremark said:
I am surprised that there has not yet been any support for VH on this one. I would never plan to cross a solid line to overtake - it's one of those things I don't do because the law says I shouldn't. Would you go through a red traffic light just because you thought it was safe?
Incidentally, since this driver was so slow wasn't it possible to pass him safely before or after the solid line?
As to whether the line system could have been better designed, it sounds as though a line system giving priority to uphill traffic but allowing overtaking downhill if uphill traffic was not using the centre lane would have been better. That sort of system is safer than the older 'suicide' 3 lane system where there was no priority for use of the centre lane. But I would never expect an individual intelligent suggestion to influence the officials who decide on such things.
Incidentally, since this driver was so slow wasn't it possible to pass him safely before or after the solid line?
As to whether the line system could have been better designed, it sounds as though a line system giving priority to uphill traffic but allowing overtaking downhill if uphill traffic was not using the centre lane would have been better. That sort of system is safer than the older 'suicide' 3 lane system where there was no priority for use of the centre lane. But I would never expect an individual intelligent suggestion to influence the officials who decide on such things.
I suspect very few of us, would put the lights in the same category of danger
as we might an apparently empty Three lane wide road
and a slow driver in front.
Further suspect (in hugh's defence)
the display of flashing lights in protest at his overtake, are also not in some way to demonstrate the numptie's agitation at non-conformity to road markings
and more the fact his pantomime slowness has not rubbed off on the people behind,
More and more coming up on people like this dawdling down the road at well below the roads speed limit, I'm getting the,
'That'll teach him attitude'
usually by their road position, response to speed cameras, and me,
taking a look around them for an overtake opportunity
and its often punctuated with
1; pointing at head,
2; Flashing lights/sounding horn
or personal fave
3; perceptible increase in speed on their part during passing
Sounds like you performed a perfectly safe illegal manoeuvre, as apposed to, a legal yet less safe manoeuvre elsewhere on the same journey.
Best stay clear of the clowns on the road like the one you happened across, much rather take the points for a fair cop than risk getting caught up in someones accident.
Best stay clear of the clowns on the road like the one you happened across, much rather take the points for a fair cop than risk getting caught up in someones accident.
An interesting dilemma Hugh. Should we never cross double white lines when we're driving?
The highway code actually does allow us to cross double white lines under certain conditions. Without referring to it directly (my copy is at work), I think the full list of circumstances when you can cross double white (solid) lines is...
In an emergency
To pass a stationary vehicle
To pass a works vehicle, cyclist or horse rider travelling at less than 10mph
Other than in those circumstances, it's an offence to cross or straddle double white lines if the one nearest to you is solid. And not just a minor offence either - it's an endorseable offence, which means it's equally as serious as things like travelling at 65mph on a single carriageway national speed limit road, rolling past a stop sign without actually stopping and using your phone whilst driving.
I've just read that back and wondered what my point was.
I think I'm trying to make a comparison which shows that there are varying levels of offence that most of us commit, either intentionally or not, in our daily driving. Does that make us all criminals? Not really. Does it make us bad drivers? Possibly not, dependent on what safety considerations you've made prior to making the manoeuvre.
Here's the crux of the matter though - would I, personally, recommend crossing the double white lines in the circumstances you've described?
No I wouldn't.
There is plenty of signage on the roads that I disagree with. Several roads near to me have had blanket 50mph speed limits introduced as a direct result of the number of accidents that have occurred on them. Being lucky enough to be in a position to do so, I've checked the statistics on these roads, and the vast majority of the accidents that led to the new speed limits being introduced are what we'd call "own goal" accidents - where the driver's (or rider's) assessment of their own ability far exceeds their actual ability, and they've fallen off the road without involving someone else. Most of the accidents involved motorcyclists. Over weekends. Born again bikers. Probably.
Before you think I've wandered off topic, my point is this - should I reduce my speed because a bunch of menopausal motorcyclists have gone daft and fallen off? No. However, if I were to be caught, I wouldn't complain, and I'd take the points like a man.
So, if, under certain conditions, it may be considered acceptable to pick and choose which speed limits to obey, isn't the same true with double white line systems? If we know the road, and we've assessed it, and it seems safe, is it not acceptable to cross them?
No. And here's why.
In all my years of driving, I've seen plenty of speed limits I disagree with, but I've never seen a double white line system that I disagree with. Maybe disagree is too strong a word - perhaps I should say that I've never seen a double white line system that I haven't understood, or that I couldn't understand the thinking behind. They're placed on blind bends, opposite blind junctions, on blind crests - anywhere, in fact, where there is a substantial zone of invisibility, and it would be unsafe to move to the offside of the road. I trust the placement of double white lines implicitly, and I make every effort to avoid crossing them or straddling them.
I'm not going to do a character assassination on you for crossing them Hugh, but next time you're out for a drive during the daytime, have a look at where they're placed, and see if you disagree with them. I doubt very much that you will.
Oh, and if I see you crossing them whilst I'm working, the pen will be coming out.
Reg.
The highway code actually does allow us to cross double white lines under certain conditions. Without referring to it directly (my copy is at work), I think the full list of circumstances when you can cross double white (solid) lines is...
In an emergency
To pass a stationary vehicle
To pass a works vehicle, cyclist or horse rider travelling at less than 10mph
Other than in those circumstances, it's an offence to cross or straddle double white lines if the one nearest to you is solid. And not just a minor offence either - it's an endorseable offence, which means it's equally as serious as things like travelling at 65mph on a single carriageway national speed limit road, rolling past a stop sign without actually stopping and using your phone whilst driving.
I've just read that back and wondered what my point was.
I think I'm trying to make a comparison which shows that there are varying levels of offence that most of us commit, either intentionally or not, in our daily driving. Does that make us all criminals? Not really. Does it make us bad drivers? Possibly not, dependent on what safety considerations you've made prior to making the manoeuvre.
Here's the crux of the matter though - would I, personally, recommend crossing the double white lines in the circumstances you've described?
No I wouldn't.
There is plenty of signage on the roads that I disagree with. Several roads near to me have had blanket 50mph speed limits introduced as a direct result of the number of accidents that have occurred on them. Being lucky enough to be in a position to do so, I've checked the statistics on these roads, and the vast majority of the accidents that led to the new speed limits being introduced are what we'd call "own goal" accidents - where the driver's (or rider's) assessment of their own ability far exceeds their actual ability, and they've fallen off the road without involving someone else. Most of the accidents involved motorcyclists. Over weekends. Born again bikers. Probably.
Before you think I've wandered off topic, my point is this - should I reduce my speed because a bunch of menopausal motorcyclists have gone daft and fallen off? No. However, if I were to be caught, I wouldn't complain, and I'd take the points like a man.
So, if, under certain conditions, it may be considered acceptable to pick and choose which speed limits to obey, isn't the same true with double white line systems? If we know the road, and we've assessed it, and it seems safe, is it not acceptable to cross them?
No. And here's why.
In all my years of driving, I've seen plenty of speed limits I disagree with, but I've never seen a double white line system that I disagree with. Maybe disagree is too strong a word - perhaps I should say that I've never seen a double white line system that I haven't understood, or that I couldn't understand the thinking behind. They're placed on blind bends, opposite blind junctions, on blind crests - anywhere, in fact, where there is a substantial zone of invisibility, and it would be unsafe to move to the offside of the road. I trust the placement of double white lines implicitly, and I make every effort to avoid crossing them or straddling them.
I'm not going to do a character assassination on you for crossing them Hugh, but next time you're out for a drive during the daytime, have a look at where they're placed, and see if you disagree with them. I doubt very much that you will.
Oh, and if I see you crossing them whilst I'm working, the pen will be coming out.
Reg.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff