Rule 130 - Hatched areas with a broken line
Discussion
M4cruiser said:
When is it "necessary" to overtake?
Never, really. Unless the obstruction is a broken down vehicle with no hope of fixing soon.
If the obstructing vehicle is doing close to the speed limit then no court will agree it was "necessary".
Beside the point.Never, really. Unless the obstruction is a broken down vehicle with no hope of fixing soon.
If the obstructing vehicle is doing close to the speed limit then no court will agree it was "necessary".
The issue is whether it was necessary to enter that hatched area in order to overtake.
The 'if necessary' clause also applies to crossing a solid white line to overtake a cyclist.
M4cruiser said:
When is it "necessary" to overtake?
Never, really. Unless the obstruction is a broken down vehicle with no hope of fixing soon.
If the obstructing vehicle is doing close to the speed limit then no court will agree it was "necessary".
You haven't read the full thread, have you?Never, really. Unless the obstruction is a broken down vehicle with no hope of fixing soon.
If the obstructing vehicle is doing close to the speed limit then no court will agree it was "necessary".
Lots of people get confused on the "necessary" part, and think that the overtake itself needs to be necessary. This is indeed not the case.
If you have decided to overtake (for whatever reason), then if it is necessary and safe to use the hatchings, then you are free to do so.
I want to do A (overtake)
It is necessary to do B (cross hatchings) in order to do A
it is not necessary to to do B without A
so ignore anyone who says you can't enter them, it is legal at any time...
e.g. you need to get a clearer view to plan your overtake, it is necessary to enter the harchig to do that, feel free
they are though a warning which should be noted, there will be a reason why they are there, so be cautious...
It is necessary to do B (cross hatchings) in order to do A
it is not necessary to to do B without A
so ignore anyone who says you can't enter them, it is legal at any time...
e.g. you need to get a clearer view to plan your overtake, it is necessary to enter the harchig to do that, feel free
they are though a warning which should be noted, there will be a reason why they are there, so be cautious...
I agree with akirk's and Mandat's interpretation - but, I do stuggle to see what practical distinction hatched areas have over any others bit of road.
So, take a non-hatched bit of road (say the opposing lane on a single carriageway road, or even lanes 2 & 3 on a motoway).
Those bits of road may be used to overtake, but only where it is safe to do so, and necessary.
Which begs the question just what is the point of hatched area borded by broken white lines?
So, take a non-hatched bit of road (say the opposing lane on a single carriageway road, or even lanes 2 & 3 on a motoway).
Those bits of road may be used to overtake, but only where it is safe to do so, and necessary.
Which begs the question just what is the point of hatched area borded by broken white lines?
Graveworm said:
It was always explained to me that it has the same effect as a broken line only wider.
Sums up their effect pretty well; but, so long as we take "necessary" to mean an overtake requires it, then there is no actual purpose of the hatching that I can see (particularly so where the other border of the hatched area is a solid line).Unless of course the purpose is in fact to confuse the majority into submission so that they refrain from using it and thereby create an enlarged separation between opposing traffic flows. At least until someone who knows differently comes along and gladly uses it.
MaxSo said:
Sums up their effect pretty well; but, so long as we take "necessary" to mean an overtake requires it, then there is no actual purpose of the hatching that I can see (particularly so where the other border of the hatched area is a solid line).
Unless of course the purpose is in fact to confuse the majority into submission so that they refrain from using it and thereby create an enlarged separation between opposing traffic flows. At least until someone who knows differently comes along and gladly uses it.
For me there are some subtle differences less to do with overtaking. In normal driving with vehicles towards you would use the whole width of your carrigeway. This effectively reduces the carriageway width keeping the carriageways further apart but still allowing vehicles to enter and cross where necessary. It also can influence what happens with queuing traffic etc. Unless of course the purpose is in fact to confuse the majority into submission so that they refrain from using it and thereby create an enlarged separation between opposing traffic flows. At least until someone who knows differently comes along and gladly uses it.
Mandat said:
M4cruiser said:
When is it "necessary" to overtake?
Never, really. Unless the obstruction is a broken down vehicle with no hope of fixing soon.
If the obstructing vehicle is doing close to the speed limit then no court will agree it was "necessary".
You haven't read the full thread, have you?Never, really. Unless the obstruction is a broken down vehicle with no hope of fixing soon.
If the obstructing vehicle is doing close to the speed limit then no court will agree it was "necessary".
Lots of people get confused on the "necessary" part, and think that the overtake itself needs to be necessary. This is indeed not the case.
If you have decided to overtake (for whatever reason), then if it is necessary and safe to use the hatchings, then you are free to do so.
Thank you for the clarification.
I can see that you did indeed say something similar on 1 November 2016.
I don't think "confusion" is the right word.
It's rather a linked point though, if entering the hatched area became necessary only because you are overtaking. If you weren't overtaking then you wouldn't have entered the hatched area.
I think it's fair to say it's a poorly implemented piece or road design and associated rule making. There is clearly confusion amongst the public as to what hatched areas bordered with a broken white line are for, and when they are allowed be used.
Because of this, I personally don't think I'd use one in the vicinity of a police car, unless it was to go around a cyclist or other very slow moving or stationary obstruction.
Because of this, I personally don't think I'd use one in the vicinity of a police car, unless it was to go around a cyclist or other very slow moving or stationary obstruction.
to be fair, there is a lot of confusion amongst the public on all sorts of aspects of law / etc - probably not helped by the general approach of passing the test and then never reading the highway code again!
I wouldn't base your choices on the misunderstanding of the public...
however, while it is legal for all sorts of reasons to drive through hatching as long as the white lines allow it, as I me tioend above, the hatching is usually there as a warning / to manage where the traffic uses the road, so it should always act as a warning and mean that you are cautious about its use...
your driving shouldn't change based on whether a police car is present
I wouldn't base your choices on the misunderstanding of the public...
however, while it is legal for all sorts of reasons to drive through hatching as long as the white lines allow it, as I me tioend above, the hatching is usually there as a warning / to manage where the traffic uses the road, so it should always act as a warning and mean that you are cautious about its use...
your driving shouldn't change based on whether a police car is present
MaxSo said:
I agree with akirk's and Mandat's interpretation - but, I do stuggle to see what practical distinction hatched areas have over any others bit of road.
So, take a non-hatched bit of road (say the opposing lane on a single carriageway road, or even lanes 2 & 3 on a motoway).
Those bits of road may be used to overtake, but only where it is safe to do so, and necessary.
Which begs the question just what is the point of hatched area borded by broken white lines?
If you are driving down the road normally then you should not use the hatched area as it is not necessary to do so, hence this has the effect of increasing the distance between the two streams of traffic, and hence safety when compaired to a single white line. If you want to overtake then it is necessary to cross the hatching in order to do so.So, take a non-hatched bit of road (say the opposing lane on a single carriageway road, or even lanes 2 & 3 on a motoway).
Those bits of road may be used to overtake, but only where it is safe to do so, and necessary.
Which begs the question just what is the point of hatched area borded by broken white lines?
I’ve seen plenty of implementations of this on more modern single carriageway town bypasses, I don’t think it is trying to indicate any hazard as such I think it’s just a case of creating a bit if space between the traffic flows.
That's fine, and I agree - but that's no different to any carriageway with more than 2 lanes. If, for example, you are in lane 1 of a 3 lane carriageway (one with with 2 lanes in your direction and 1 opposing) then lane 2 should only be used if it is necessary to do so (ie due to overtaking or turning right) and, obviously, also safe to do so.
akirk said:
to be fair, there is a lot of confusion amongst the public on all sorts of aspects of law / etc - probably not helped by the general approach of passing the test and then never reading the highway code again!
I wouldn't base your choices on the misunderstanding of the public...
however, while it is legal for all sorts of reasons to drive through hatching as long as the white lines allow it, as I me tioend above, the hatching is usually there as a warning / to manage where the traffic uses the road, so it should always act as a warning and mean that you are cautious about its use...
your driving shouldn't change based on whether a police car is present
I'm not basing my choice to not use them in the vicinity of a police car on the misunderstanding of the public, as I would use them amongst the public and if I was not aware of any police. Rather, I'm basing it on the potential for a misunderstanding of the rules by a police officer, and a desire, despite me being correct, to not get into a debate with a police officer about it and risk getting points. That'd just be extremely annoying (more so than getting points when deserved), and any attempts to seek redress would be time consuming. So I'd rather just avoid the potential for that occuring, if I'm aware of police at the time.I wouldn't base your choices on the misunderstanding of the public...
however, while it is legal for all sorts of reasons to drive through hatching as long as the white lines allow it, as I me tioend above, the hatching is usually there as a warning / to manage where the traffic uses the road, so it should always act as a warning and mean that you are cautious about its use...
your driving shouldn't change based on whether a police car is present
I'm cautious about using any bit of road, but I suppose they may help the majority in helping to guide them away from oncoming traffic(!). It's primarily the confusion around the rules for their use that bothers me. The majority of the public, it seems, appear to believe they shouldn't be used at all, or just aren't sure. Then we have those that are aware of the rules, but interpret "necessary" to somehow mean "almost essential" (passing a very slow tractor etc). And then we have us, who I suspect are the minority. It's this confusion that is bothering, because any road rules that are open to varying interpretation like this are just bad rules.
MaxSo said:
...any road rules that are open to varying interpretation like this are just bad rules.
but they are not open to varying interpretation - the legislation and then the guidance (HC) are both very clear...the fact that some members of the public, or even the majority, have little understanding of the law / Highway Code is a separate issue - it doesn't make the law wrong...
when people don't know the law and then make up what they think is the right answer, or get confused because it is white lines and somehow that must be the same as solid white lines and therefore you can't drive over them - that is confusion amongst the public - it is not bad rules...
the actual law is very simple and very clear:
- look at the boundary lines and observe like any other central white line - solid / dashed and size / spacing of the dashes - that tells you whether you can go across the line or not - and what level of risk there might be...
- other than that - generally don't drive in this area, but you can if you need to = hatchings...
public confusion doesn't change that underlying simplicity...
Ok, it's just semantics then. Bottom line is people think they mean something different, and that mix of what people think they mean isn't helpful. It may be that the hatched areas do serve a purpose, but the explanation and education of them is not adequate. If the majority seem not to properly understand a particular road marking and the rules associated with it, then it's not much use blaming the majority (although they are at fault); rather, it is better to improve the marking, rules and/or the explanation & education of them so a majority of people all think they mean the same thing.
M4cruiser said:
Hi Mandat,
Thank you for the clarification.
I can see that you did indeed say something similar on 1 November 2016.
I don't think "confusion" is the right word.
It's rather a linked point though, if entering the hatched area became necessary only because you are overtaking. If you weren't overtaking then you wouldn't have entered the hatched area.
It isn't necessary to have an M4.Thank you for the clarification.
I can see that you did indeed say something similar on 1 November 2016.
I don't think "confusion" is the right word.
It's rather a linked point though, if entering the hatched area became necessary only because you are overtaking. If you weren't overtaking then you wouldn't have entered the hatched area.
Checks profile, ah, Toyota Avensis, as you were that explains it.
Graveworm said:
Any Police officer who has undergone driver training would be all too aware of the nuances of hatch markings, solid and dotted lines.
Nice, in theory, but some people have had other experiences.https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
MaxSo said:
Ok, it's just semantics then. Bottom line is people think they mean something different, and that mix of what people think they mean isn't helpful. It may be that the hatched areas do serve a purpose, but the explanation and education of them is not adequate. If the majority seem not to properly understand a particular road marking and the rules associated with it, then it's not much use blaming the majority (although they are at fault); rather, it is better to improve the marking, rules and/or the explanation & education of them so a majority of people all think they mean the same thing.
Sorry - we will have to partially disagree...too much of society is being altered on that basis - let's alter the laws to suit those who have no idea... / to suit the symptoms
we have some very good and simple legislation in places - if there is an issue, then the answer is not to deal with the symptoms, but to deal with the underlying cause - if people don't understand the legislation, then if it is an issue, they need to read the highway code - it is a pretty clear and easy to read document...
So I agree with the need to improve the education - but there is no need to improve the markings - they are one of the simplest markings on the road to comprehend
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff