Indicate left after overtaking, or lane change on a motorway

[toon10]

BOR said:

I rarely even indicate right to overtake, let alone left to pull back in.

You can see how fast I'm closing on the next car in my lane, what exactly do you think is going to happen next ?

I can imagine the insurance call now. "So, you pulled into lane two and that's when the car in front pulled into lane two and the collision occurred. It's just his insurance company said you didn't indicate so, er..."

[_Hoppers]

toon10 said:

BOR said:

I rarely even indicate right to overtake, let alone left to pull back in.

You can see how fast I'm closing on the next car in my lane, what exactly do you think is going to happen next ?

I can imagine the insurance call now. "So, you pulled into lane two and that's when the car in front pulled into lane two and the collision occurred. It's just his insurance company said you didn't indicate so, er..."

If the driver didn't see BOR bearing down on them and moving into lane two, would they have noticed an indicator?!

[Dr Jekyll]

toon10 said:

BOR said:

I rarely even indicate right to overtake, let alone left to pull back in.

You can see how fast I'm closing on the next car in my lane, what exactly do you think is going to happen next ?

I can imagine the insurance call now. "So, you pulled into lane two and that's when the car in front pulled into lane two and the collision occurred. It's just his insurance company said you didn't indicate so, er..."

Meanwhile the other guy is saying 'I didn't bother to check before I pulled out but I gave a signal so it isn't my fault.'

[Lily the Pink]

A suggestion for all those who advocate indicating on every occasion : on your next drive, every time you see another vehicle indicating, ask yourself "does that indication affect my driving plan ?" I would estimate that on my typical drive (mainly rural/main road, rarely urban) the answer would be that 75% of the time it doesn't; it's just noise. A typical example would be at or approaching the stop/giveway line at a T-junction with just a single lane approach. You can tell more by the wheel positions and angle of the car in front than you can by their indicator - whether you're behind them or on the major road.

[Far Cough]

MIRROR then SIGNAL then MANOUEVRE ................not any otherway round



Do they not teach this anymore ?

I think the current consensus is you only need to indicate if it will benefit anyone around you.

[toon10]

_Hoppers said:

If the driver didn't see BOR bearing down on them and moving into lane two, would they have noticed an indicator?!

I don't think it matters. One of the first questions an insurance company asks when you detail an incident like that is did you indicate. They asked me when I got rear ended and the guy claimed I pulled into his lane (I was already in lane 2 and he was just tailgating and didn't react when I had to brake for a car pulling out on me.) It can affect how they apportion blame so I don't put myself in that position. If I pull out to overtake, I indicate. If I pull back in, I indicate. It takes away doubt in making claims.

[Foss62]

toon10 said:

_Hoppers said:

If the driver didn't see BOR bearing down on them and moving into lane two, would they have noticed an indicator?!

I don't think it matters. One of the first questions an insurance company asks when you detail an incident like that is did you indicate. They asked me when I got rear ended and the guy claimed I pulled into his lane (I was already in lane 2 and he was just tailgating and didn't react when I had to brake for a car pulling out on me.) It can affect how they apportion blame so I don't put myself in that position. If I pull out to overtake, I indicate. If I pull back in, I indicate. It takes away doubt in making claims.

I’m not sure I get this...Your answer would have to have been ‘yes I indicated’ (unless your brake lights were faulty), as you were clearly indicating your intention to stop.
In other circumstances indicating to turn could actually make you more culpable in many people’s eyes if for example, a collision occurred because someone thought you were going to make a manoeuvre before the one you were actually signalling for.
Furthermore, without a full forensic investigation it would be very difficult to prove what signalling was taking place at the time, whereas vehicle damage, photos of the incident, dash cameras etc. would tell their own stories.

[Dixy]

toon10 said:

I don't think it matters. One of the first questions an insurance company asks when you detail an incident like that is did you indicate. They asked me when I got rear ended and the guy claimed I pulled into his lane (I was already in lane 2 and he was just tailgating and didn't react when I had to brake for a car pulling out on me.) It can affect how they apportion blame so I don't put myself in that position. If I pull out to overtake, I indicate. If I pull back in, I indicate. It takes away doubt in making claims.

How are you going to have a collision when returning to lane 1 because of anything other than lack of observation on your behalf. You have passed a vehicle, allowed sufficient space before returning left done a NS mirror and shoulder check and moved left, where has this insurance claim come from.

[Lily the Pink]

toon10 said:

I don't think it matters. One of the first questions an insurance company asks when you detail an incident like that is did you indicate. They asked me when I got rear ended and the guy claimed I pulled into his lane (I was already in lane 2 and he was just tailgating and didn't react when I had to brake for a car pulling out on me.) It can affect how they apportion blame so I don't put myself in that position. If I pull out to overtake, I indicate. If I pull back in, I indicate. It takes away doubt in making claims.

That's confusing. If you were already in lane 2, why would you have been indicating ?

[Vipers]

Googled found site for driving tips, it says this:-


After overtaking, use MSM
After overtaking, use the Mirror, Signal, Manoeuvre routine to move back into the left lane

Once you feel there is a safe distance from the car to enable you to move back into the left lane, look into your interior mirror and left side mirror.

To be safe, take a look into the left blind spot to ensure all is clear there; motorbikes can come from know where.

Signal to the left, again to let other know of your intentions. It is not mandatory to signal to the left when moving back in, although if the motorway is busy, it’s a good idea to do so.

Doesnt seem to be a hard and fast rule, it also says dont bother indicating if it serves no purpose to other road users.

[henrycrun]

Lily the Pink said:

A suggestion for all those who advocate indicating on every occasion : on your next drive, every time you see another vehicle indicating, ask yourself "does that indication affect my driving plan ?" I would estimate that on my typical drive (mainly rural/main road, rarely urban) the answer would be that 75% of the time it doesn't; it's just noise. A typical example would be at or approaching the stop/giveway line at a T-junction with just a single lane approach. You can tell more by the wheel positions and angle of the car in front than you can by their indicator - whether you're behind them or on the major road.

However, it can be rather hard to spot where wheels are pointing during poor visibility or after dark.

[nonsequitur]

Jon39 said:

This might now be taught during the driving test, but I only indicate left when the move needs to be communicated to following drivers. Am I correct?

An example where to me, it would appear to be unnecessary.
Light traffic on a motorway. You indicate a move from lane 1 to lane 2, in order to overtake a large HGV. After the overtake has been completed, and there is generous space in front of the lorry, I return to lane 1 without indicating. The only vehicle of concern is the HGV which I have just overtaken, and that can hardly be expected to quickly accelerate to close the gap between us.
Some drivers do indicate left after such a manoeuvre, and I wonder why they do it.

Any comments?

I always indicate in all motoring situations. As above, filter lanes, 'obvious' manoevres, entering a parking space etc etc. It's rude not to. You are letting your fellow road users what your intentions are. Other road users are of course, dozy pedestrians and dozy cyclists. Others are available.
No other traffic around? Do you REALLY know?
Indicating, in our modern motoring world, is fast becoming an optional extra for a large percentage of drivers.
I don't indicate by rote, zombie like, each is a controlled and measured move.

[Lily the Pink]

henrycrun said:

Lily the Pink said:

A suggestion for all those who advocate indicating on every occasion : on your next drive, every time you see another vehicle indicating, ask yourself "does that indication affect my driving plan ?" I would estimate that on my typical drive (mainly rural/main road, rarely urban) the answer would be that 75% of the time it doesn't; it's just noise. A typical example would be at or approaching the stop/giveway line at a T-junction with just a single lane approach. You can tell more by the wheel positions and angle of the car in front than you can by their indicator - whether you're behind them or on the major road.

However, it can be rather hard to spot where wheels are pointing during poor visibility or after dark.

Yes. So ?

[nonsequitur]

Lily the Pink said:

To all you automatons who always indicate regardless of need, I assume you're amongst those morons who sit in a right-hand lane which is only going right and yet you still have your indicator going, thus adding to the visual "noise" on the roads ?

I don't think you get this indicating lark, Lillo.

[Turn7]

Ahbefive said:

Just signal for every lane change, it's really not difficult.

This.

Moving anywhere other than straight forward, ALWAYS signal....

[Lily the Pink]

nonsequitur said:

I don't think you get this indicating lark, Lillo.

Better than most, nonse

[waremark]

Most people who indicate for lane changes indicate as they start to change lanes. At this late stage indicating is pointless. Any affected driver sees the lane change at the same time or indeed often before seeing the indicator. If there is a reason to indicate there is also a reason to leave time to respond before manoeuvring - if a lane change could affect another driver I suggest indicating for 4 or 5 clicks before starting to manoeuver. If you think it is ok to manoeuver without waiting several clicks after starting to indicate then there was no point in indicating.

Edited by waremark on Saturday 20th July 01:53

[meatballs]

Quite a lot of people are erratic and change lanes / start to change lanes without indicating and promptly swerve back into their own lanes because they are on their phone/chatting/asleep. Even a short indication shows that the maneuver is intentional and not just someone meandering down the road.

[Dixy]

Turn7 said:

This.

Moving anywhere other than straight forward, ALWAYS signal....

So the road curves left or right? you are passing a parked car? you are passing a cyclist? The road curves to the right but there is a T junction that is straight ahead.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.9047602,-3.00254...

[nonsequitur]

Dixy said:

Turn7 said:

This.

Moving anywhere other than straight forward, ALWAYS signal....

So the road curves left or right? you are passing a parked car? you are passing a cyclist? The road curves to the right but there is a T junction that is straight ahead.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.9047602,-3.00254...

I think Turn7 was saying moving forward without the necessity for an indication. I knew what he meant anyway.

As in all threads concerning indication, many PHers saying why they don't indicate, when it is so simple to actually indicate. Not by rote but a calculated move with thought behind any decisions.