Going over solid white line ... your word Vs his ?

[Streetcop]

jacko lah said:

Streetcop said: Dont forget..the solid white lines mean...'No Crossing them'...not necessarily 'No overtaking'... So for example, if the lane is quite wide and there is a motorcyclist behind; if you move over slightly and he can pass between you and the solid white line, it's perfectly legal for Mr Biker. Street There is a theory that removing ALL lines would improve road safety, as people would have to think.

That's the problem...too many people can't think!

I think the only place where no lines works is on narrow lanes where it narrows even further. The lack of lines at that time means drivers automatically slow as their 'comfort' line has gone..As for doing it the rest of the roads..

Street

[mattrsv]

gone said:

mattrsv said: Personally when out on the bike I pay cursory attention to the placement of double white lines. I think you need to pay absolutley full attention to these signs. They are traffic signs exactly the same as a red traffic light. Do you pay cursory attention to those too? are you an Amber Gambler? 'Cursory', poor description on my part. You could say I take full attention and make my own decision as I would do on any road lines or no lines (I guess we won't ever agree on this anyway). It goes without saying I adhere to traffic lights, no, I am not an Ambler Gambler! mattrsv said: I was out with a BIB friend at the weekend and we had this discussion over a beer. He said he would not overtake on double whites for fear of being caught.... No, his concern was with being caught by colleagues. He could not fault my overtake in anyway way and probably more than in the Biblical sense of 'being caught' mattrsv said: while agreeing that the overtakes I made on double whites were all 100% safe. It would be interesting to understand the criteria for double whites as I know plenty of places where passes can be made 100% safely on the bike or in the Tiv. That may be so until you meet yourself coming the other way! Then what? I ride within my capabilities and would only perform an overtake where it is safe, lines or no lines. Do you, or have you had a m'bike? On a bike you have the ability to use the full width of the road to obtain best vision. You also have a little more height and it is often possible to see much further down the road than in a car. mattrsv said: I guess it is another case of lowest common denominator (1.0 Metro) Not necessarily! So, my guess is wrong, how is it decided where double whites are out on the road? mattrsv said: Why adhere to a rule that does nothing for your, or anyone else's safety. I find that statement quite disturbing to think that you are so good that you will never become a hazard when you decide to be on the wrong side of a solid white line you pay corsory attention to! That word again, I do not ride like a nutter! mattrsv said: As has already been said I use them as a guide only bearing in mind the performance of my vehicle, road condition, blah blah blah. I hope you don't ever have the unfortunate situation where you are having to explain that to an investigating traffpol or a judge , from what you have posted, I cannot be so sure! True, I accept this may/will happen, the same as I may get stopped for speeding at some time. mattrsv said: I am sure I will come a cropper one day for my personal interpretation of road traffic guidelines, however, until that day I shall continue with my own judgement, not that of a white line painter. I hope for your and the other persons sake, you all survice it! That was badly written, my 'cropper' was of the law only! I do not consider any overtakes performed on double whites to be dangerous. They are overtakes, the same as on the rest of the road network. >> Edited by gone on Monday 12th July 23:26

I am learning that you have to be very careful with describing things, still the essence of my email has not changed so I guess we will never reach common ground on this one

[Streetcop]

You're doing ok Mattrsv...don't worry..

Street

[TripleS]

The trouble with many of these debates is that we do not really know how other drivers are actually behaving in real situations. All we have to judge by are the descriptions posted here, and sometimes we may conjure up our own mental picture of what is being done and that may not be a sound basis from which to make a reliable judgement.

In the absence of more concrete information I tend to be influenced by the attitude and approach being displayed, and my guess is that mattrsv is looking at the practicalities in a logical manner, and is probably safe in what he is doing.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[gone]

Unfortunately, someone who decideds to ignore a mandatory sign that is placed to attempt to avoid conflict between moving vehicles because 'they think they know better' or are 'good enough' to do so deserves everything that may well be coming there way the next time they do it.

I lost a very close friend and a top Police Motorcycle advanced instructor at the end of a course about 12 years ago when someone decided to take their artic around a tractor that was driving slowly in a solid white line system. The course (4 riders) came around the bend to be met by the artic on completely the wrong side. They were not even travelling quickly because it was the afternoon after the test and was a wind down run.

The leader managed to squeeze through an impossible gap, Pete was 2nd and had to take to the verge to miss the artic, came off and hit the only tree in the hedge . Number 3 got through and number 4 went through the hedge into the field. Pete never regained consciousness. Probably the best motrcuclist I or any of my colleagues will ever come across but because somone decided that they knew better than the sign, he is no longer here!

[Streetcop]

God Bless him and rest his soul..

Gary

[TripleS]

gone said:

Unfortunately, someone who decideds to ignore a mandatory sign that is placed to attempt to avoid conflict between moving vehicles because 'they think they know better' or are 'good enough' to do so deserves everything that may well be coming there way the next time they do it. I lost a very close friend and a top Police Motorcycle advanced instructor at the end of a course about 12 years ago when someone decided to take their artic around a tractor that was driving slowly in a solid white line system. The course (4 riders) came around the bend to be met by the artic on completely the wrong side. They were not even travelling quickly because it was the afternoon after the test and was a wind down run. The leader managed to squeeze through an impossible gap, Pete was 2nd and had to take to the verge to miss the artic, came off and hit the only tree in the hedge . Number 3 got through and number 4 went through the hedge into the field. Pete never regained consciousness. Probably the best motrcuclist I or any of my colleagues will ever come across but because somone decided that they knew better than the sign, he is no longer here!

Well I'm very sorry about that tragic event 'gone' but some applications of the double white line system can be safely ignored, although that clearly was not one of them. So long as one is quite sure that there is no possibility of coming into conflict with another road user there is no problem, and that is the basis on which I judge them. I do not take risks when contravening the system, and only by being there at the time and seeing all the elements of the situation would you be able to form a reliable judgement on that.

I imagine we shall continue to take a different attitude to this.

It is all very well for you to make remarks about those who 'think they know better' but it is entirely possible that an experienced driver with a well proven long term safety record will in fact know better than those who applied the system (who knows with what degree of expertise) probably many years earlier.

Quite frankly I am a bit fed up of people who class themselves as experts in some subject, and then take the attitude that every time there is a difference of opinion with an outsider (like me in this case) the expert view will always be the correct one. In this case you may be right and I may be wrong, but there is no certainty it is that way round.

By the way 'gone', how are you getting on with the VHS tape from Mungo and case of the Flying Scotsman?

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[gone]

TripleS said:

Quite frankly I am a bit fed up of people who class themselves as experts in some subject, and then take the attitude that every time there is a difference of opinion with an outsider (like me in this case) the expert view will always be the correct one.

Quite frankly I get a bit fed up scraping the bits up when people decide to use their better judgement
This is an enforceable traffic sign. It is covered by the same regulation as a red traffic light.
Expert opinion or not, it is there to stop the possiblity of conflict by engineers who design the road. There may be things in the environment that the driver who makes the decision to ignore them does not know about!

TripleS said:

In this case you may be right and I may be wrong, but there is no certainty it is that way round.

I can tell you it is catagorically wrong to cross a solid white line unless an exemption is applied. I can tell you that because the law says so!

TripleS said:

By the way 'gone', how are you getting on with the VHS tape from Mungo and case of the Flying Scotsman? Best wishes all, Dave.

Still haven't got the tape. I haven't seen Mungo for some time because o his training commitment. Hopefully he will post it to me soon.

[TripleS]

gone said:

TripleS said: Quite frankly I am a bit fed up of people who class themselves as experts in some subject, and then take the attitude that every time there is a difference of opinion with an outsider (like me in this case) the expert view will always be the correct one. Quite frankly I get a bit fed up scraping the bits up when people decide to use their better judgement This is an enforceable traffic sign. It is covered by the same regulation as a red traffic light. Expert opinion or not, it is there to stop the possiblity of conflict by engineers who design the road. There may be things in the environment that the driver who makes the decision to ignore them does not know about! TripleS said: In this case you may be right and I may be wrong, but there is no certainty it is that way round. I can tell you it is catagorically wrong to cross a solid white line unless an exemption is applied. I can tell you that because the law says so! TripleS said: By the way 'gone', how are you getting on with the VHS tape from Mungo and case of the Flying Scotsman? Best wishes all, Dave. Still haven't got the tape. I haven't seen Mungo for some time because o his training commitment. Hopefully he will post it to me soon.

Please believe me 'gone' I really do wish you and your colleagues were faced with less of a need to be sweeping the bits up when people get it wrong.

Of course I accept that it is a mandatory traffic sign, I never sought to dispute that.

As for 'engineers' designing the road layout and the white lining system, I could show you various places around here where the markings are complete nonsense, and if you were to see them for yourself I think you would probably agree with me.

As I have said before, I trust my judgement of the situation - on site, on the day, looking at all the relevant factors - better than that of someone else who is not there at the time, and who might have made a mistake anyhow.

You are of course right about what the law says, but on the other aspects I guess we must agree to differ on this one. Sorry.

I know Mungo will be busy as he prepares to 'go live' but I am looking forward to hearing your views on this Flying Scotsman business when you have a chance to look at it.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[supraman2954]

Streetcop said:

Hi Supraman... The problem is...the solid white line should be treated like a brick wall....Even hardened speeders etc usually have an unwritten rule not to contravene solid white lines.. People coming the other way, quite rightly feel that their side of the road will be devoid of any oncoming vehicles due to the solid white line. Motorcyclist sit 3/4 way out in their lane and wouldn't expect a vehicle coming towards them to cross the solid lines.

I have a very simple rule for this: if you can't see it, then don't do it. Common sense really!

Streetcop said:

The lines will be put there for safety reasons only. There's no money generation or Scamera stuff here....just solid white lines due to either a bend, hidden dip, crest of a hill etc... It's the only bit of the RTA1988 that I don't think anybody could argue against. Street

See my statement above

TripleS said:

I have an unwritten rule that says I do not risk coming into conflict with other road users. Obviously it is illegal to contravene the double white line system, but it is not necessarily unsafe to do so. It might be a more useful system if it were to be applied more carefully, but I see too many situations where the 'experts' are obviously not getting it right. Best wishes all, Dave.

Agreed

Hi Streetcop. This is the earliest that I could have replied back cos I have the (potential) German in-laws staying with me. I haven't mentioned 'IT' yet!

The double white line situation is bollox: there are places where I would not consider overtaking, and there are others where I am very sure I can 100% safely perform the manoeuvre. I reckon there is little correlation between this and the placement of the double white lines. Needless to say, this is another rule which I ignore.

However, my original point was concerning the severity of the penalty of crossing said lines, would you not agree?

[Melv]

When I did my Institue of Advanced Motorists Test and went on to observation, the IAM had it clarified at the time that it was NOT an offence to cross the white line in order to straighten up a bend in order to improve observation, vision around a corner, pass slow vehicles (pushbikes, tractors, badger hunters, etc.,) provided that it did not compromise or endanger oncoming traffic.....

Mel

[Dwight VanDriver]

Thats a single white line...

Double, with continuous on your side is a no no unless for certain exemptions and road straightening aint one of them.

DVD

[Streetcop]

Melv said:

When I did my Institue of Advanced Motorists Test and went on to observation, the IAM had it clarified at the time that it was NOT an offence to cross the white line in order to straighten up a bend in order to improve observation, vision around a corner, pass slow vehicles (pushbikes, tractors, badger hunters, etc.,) provided that it did not compromise or endanger oncoming traffic..... Mel

What?

I'm not having a go at you Mel, but the information you've been given is bollocks.

I'm a member of the IAM for both cars and bikes and the above is incorrect in the extreme. I'm also a Bib (obviously) and if the above statement was said to me, I would just copy it onto the back of the ticket for 3 points and £60 fine..

Street

[pmanson]

Streetcop said:

Melv said: When I did my Institue of Advanced Motorists Test and went on to observation, the IAM had it clarified at the time that it was NOT an offence to cross the white line in order to straighten up a bend in order to improve observation, vision around a corner, pass slow vehicles (pushbikes, tractors, badger hunters, etc.,) provided that it did not compromise or endanger oncoming traffic..... Mel What? I'm not having a go at you Mel, but the information you've been given is bollocks. I'm a member of the IAM for both cars and bikes and the above is incorrect in the extreme. I'm also a Bib (obviously) and if the above statement was said to me, I would just copy it onto the back of the ticket for 3 points and £60 fine.. Street

Agree with you on this one. My RideDrive instrutor pulled me up for safely (i hasten to add) straightlining an small S bend when I could see the whole through the road. (eg. It was a kink in the road). He said what I did was safe however the marking stated that I couldn't do it and that he would have pulled me over for a chat if he had seen me do it.

Singles white lines are fair game though.