Speeding whilst overtaking

[sunday-driver]

Is it a defence when prosecuted for speeding to say you were performing a safe overtaking manoeuvre at the time? (73 in a 60, single carriageway). I always thought you were allowed to exceed the limit when overtaking, but I may have read that in Viz or something.

[DeKo]

In the interest of safety its sometimes necessary to speed while overtaking, but their rebuttal will simply be that if you couldnt do the overtake without exceeding the speed limit you shouldnt have done it at all.

[ymwoods]

anyone else will say its ok to break the limit by a 'little bit' to make progress round a car as quickly and safely as possible...the Bib will say that if the car infront was going quick enough that you had to speed to overtake then you should not have needed to overtake.

[Jasandjules]

sunday-driver said:

Is it a defence when prosecuted for speeding to say you were performing a safe overtaking manoeuvre at the time? (73 in a 60, single carriageway). I always thought you were allowed to exceed the limit when overtaking, but I may have read that in Viz or something.

No, it's not a defence.

[TR808]

ymwoods said:

anyone else will say its ok to break the limit by a 'little bit' to make progress round a car as quickly and safely as possible...the Bib will say that if the car infront was going quick enough that you had to speed to overtake then you should not have needed to overtake.

In my experience BiB will generally allow a blip to aid an overtake if safe. The scamera partnerships won't if you reach 10% + 2mph above the limit of over.

One of my main issues with the scamera lot is that they will do you for speeding whilst overtaking, whilst blissfully ignoring the overtakee who speeds up through their own carelessness or to 'to stop you getting past'.

[streaky]

TR808 said:

The scamera partnerships won't if you reach 10% + 2mph above the limit of over.

Where have you been? - Streaky

[UpTheIron]

sunday-driver said:

Is it a defence when prosecuted for speeding to say you were performing a safe overtaking manoeuvre at the time? (73 in a 60, single carriageway).

Of course it isn't. I do however have personal experience of an officer showing some leniency as "there was nothing wrong with my riding, other than exceeding the limit" whilst overtaking 3 cars. It didn't get me off, but made the difference between a FPN or a court appearance.

sunday-driver said:

I always thought you were allowed to exceed the limit when overtaking, but I may have read that in Viz or something.

Why would you think that though? Is it also OK to drink drive in an emergency? (the answer is no btw).

[TR808]

streaky said:

TR808 said:

The scamera partnerships won't if you reach 10% + 2mph above the limit of over.

Where have you been? - Streaky

Buttertubs pass yesterday!

[blank]

You can't honestly think it's "allowed" to break the speed limit 'cause you're overtaking can you?


If you've already got the letter then I'd say it was too late. A policeman may have shown discretion if you were lucky.


Something similar happened to a mate of mine, he was overtaking a car going up a hill with a crawler lane. The overtakee tried to speed up and stop him. So instead of pulling in behind my mate sped up and overtook. Unfortunately there was a BIB at the top of the hill watching.

He got pulled and done for speeding, copper was sympathetic but just said you could have pulled in behind. The guy who sped up got done for speeding, and a right royal bking for driving like a tt.

[Fort Jefferson]

sunday-driver said:

Is it a defence when prosecuted for speeding to say you were performing a safe overtaking manoeuvre at the time? (73 in a 60, single carriageway). I always thought you were allowed to exceed the limit when overtaking, but I may have read that in Viz or something.

Or on Pistonheads.

[Puddenchucker]

I think this misunderstanding (I won't call it a myth) that you are allowed to exceed the speed limit whilst overtaking, has arisen from the wording in the Highway Code, which states, in the current edition (rule 163), "..move quickly past the vehicle you are overtaking." Older editions have had similar wording.

Edited by Puddenchucker on Saturday 12th September 11:24

[sunday-driver]

ok, looks like was clutching at straws after all. At least it was only 73mph when the devil's zapper triggered.

UpTheIron, thanks for confirming it is not ok to drink n drive in an emergency. I'll write that on the post-it note on my sun visor as a reminder; alongside the existing note saying "sit facing this way"

[p1esk]

UpTheIron said:

sunday-driver said:

Is it a defence when prosecuted for speeding to say you were performing a safe overtaking manoeuvre at the time? (73 in a 60, single carriageway).

Of course it isn't. I do however have personal experience of an officer showing some leniency as "there was nothing wrong with my riding, other than exceeding the limit" whilst overtaking 3 cars. It didn't get me off, but made the difference between a FPN or a court appearance.

sunday-driver said:

I always thought you were allowed to exceed the limit when overtaking, but I may have read that in Viz or something.

Why would you think that though? Is it also OK to drink drive in an emergency? (the answer is no btw).

Wrong! It is OK to drink drive in an emergency, and at other times.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[GreenV8S]

UpTheIron said:

Is it also OK to drink drive in an emergency? (the answer is no btw).

I'm not a lawyer but I had the impression that the legal system allows for penalties to be dropped if you have sufficient reason to break the law. So, if the reason is sufficient it might not be OK in the sense that it is breaking the law, but I would argue that it is OK in the sense that it is recognised as necessary and desirable and should not be penalised.

[Dr Jekyll]

I think we are lucky it's still legal to overtake at all.

[CharlieTwo]

GreenV8S said:

UpTheIron said:

Is it also OK to drink drive in an emergency? (the answer is no btw).

I'm not a lawyer but I had the impression that the legal system allows for penalties to be dropped if you have sufficient reason to break the law. So, if the reason is sufficient it might not be OK in the sense that it is breaking the law, but I would argue that it is OK in the sense that it is recognised as necessary and desirable and should not be penalised.

The defence is one of duress or necessity. However, it is very narrow and in DPP v Hicks 2002 - an excess alcohol case - the Administrative Court set out guidelines to be applied before the defence of necessity would generally be available to a driver:-

• the defence is only available if the driving was undertaken to avoid consequences that could not otherwise be avoided;
• those consequences must have been both inevitable and involved the risk of serious harm to the driver or someone else for whom he/she was responsible;
• the driver must do not more than is reasonably necessary to avoid the harm;
• the danger of so driving must not be disproportionate to the harm threatened.

(Above points quoted from Blackstones Road Policing 2007)
What that means is that to escape serious harm one might drive and have a defence to doing so in otherwise unlawful circumstances, but the moment that harm is sufficiently reduced or is removed you must stop driving i.e. carrying on driving while over the prescribed limit all the way home is likely to eliminate the defence.

[sunday-driver]

I have just realised Dave is quite right - it is ok to drink n drive (within prescribed limits). I have therefore removed that post-it note. But I am keeping the one reminding me to sit facing forwards as I think it still applies (but added 'except when reversing')

No more speeding though. No siree.

[Quick silver]

TR808 said:

ymwoods said:

anyone else will say its ok to break the limit by a 'little bit' to make progress round a car as quickly and safely as possible...the Bib will say that if the car infront was going quick enough that you had to speed to overtake then you should not have needed to overtake.

In my experience BiB will generally allow a blip to aid an overtake if safe. The scamera partnerships won't if you reach 10% + 2mph above the limit of over.

One of my main issues with the scamera lot is that they will do you for speeding whilst overtaking, whilst blissfully ignoring the overtakee who speeds up through their own carelessness or to 'to stop you getting past'.

^^^^ what he said with bells on.

[Shaw Tarse]

My driving instructor told me it was OK to break the speed limit if it could made the overtake safer.
I'm sure this would stand up in a court of law

[geek_in_the_pink]

Shaw Tarse said:

My driving instructor told me it was OK to break the speed limit if it could made the overtake safer.
I'm sure this would stand up in a court of law

Your driving instructor was obviously a moron!