Middle lane hoggers.

[slowwww]

Just forwarded the BBC link re this to my father, who refuses to drive in the inside lane even if there's nobody in the inside lane in the same county.
I anticipate that my inheritance will be spent by Xmas if the cops enforce this rigourously!

 

[Brandane]

In 10 plus years of driving in excess of 30K miles PA.... I can honestly say, I've never, ever been frustrated by a "middle lane hogger".

If they are "hogging" the middle lane, then by implication the inside (and more often than not, the outside) lanes are completely free.

Just use them.

Except that, as you will know, it is illegal to overtake on the left in this country. Let's not forget too, that HGVs are not allowed in the right hand lane on roads where there are more than 2 lanes. So what are they supposed to do when they are heading along the 3 lane motorway at 56 mph and that little red Nissan Micra complete with traveling rug on the rear parcel shelf is sitting in the middle lane at 45mph, oblivious to all around them?

 

[snorri]

Three lanes in one direction is just encouraging them, why don't we tax them all more heavily instead of just fining a few?

 

[Spinney]

And is congestion not harmful to the environment?

Not if it makes people think about using a bike or train instead!!

 

[Archie_tect]

but not a megabus....

 

[PaulB]

As someone who does the best part of 35-40k miles a year trying to drive by the rules of the middle lane is near on impossible. You stay left and you are stuck doing 56mph behind a long line of HGV's go to the outside land and you have a photo copier toner salesman trying to get a Bluetooth connection with his phone and ear piece doing 99.9mph in his 'beemer' 2 feet from the person in front, so that lane is out of the question, so I cant see how they can really police this at most times during the day. Then there's always the HGV driver who has a restriction of 56mph trying to overtake another that also has a 56mph restriction, who somehow thinks taking 5 miles to pass him to get one lorry length in front is going to get him to the ferry port soooo much earlier. It's madness out there.

That is condoning laziness that is. I too drive 35-40,000 miles a year and have done so since 1983 so I have a few miles under my belt and think I've seen enough to be allowed a comment on this. Middle-lane-Malcolms are effectively causing or adding to a motorway's congestion with their selfish antics. Since they are reducing the capacity of a three-lane motorway by eliminating the inside lane from all vehicles behind them they just became part of the problem. I get it that people don't want the hassle of actually moving (can't spell manoevr,,,,,,whatever) from the lane they shouldn't be in to the one they should be in so no end of excuses pour forth to justify such gormless behaviour.

And those that think they are doing 70 MPH so therefore no-one should be allowed to overtake them! No, you are wrong. Your 70 MPH is almost certain to be around 63 MPH given the vagaries of spedometers so don't rely on YOUR reading unless you had it calibrated within the last half hour.

 

[Brandane]

Except you're not overtaking in the left hand lane in the circumstances Smeggers outlines... you're simply passing the vehicle that's in the middle lane. So it's not illegal and you can put that straw man to bed...

I suggest you read up on your Highway Code!! Here are the circumstances which Smeggers referred to:

In 10 plus years of driving in excess of 30K miles PA.... I can honestly say, I've never, ever been frustrated by a "middle lane hogger".

If they are "hogging" the middle lane, then by implication the inside (and more often than not, the outside) lanes are completely free.

Just use them.

So the middle lane is occupied, and the lanes either side are "completely free". You think it would be legal to pass on the left?
Here is what the HC says:

268

Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

 

[User482]

Becuase you have large number of trucks who spend their time simply overtaking each other. A overtakes B, and a few minutes later B overtakes A, and so it goes on ad nauseam (although sometime lorry C gets involved for a bit of variety). They take forever to overtake each other, travelling well below the speed limit, and on a oad like the A14 this causes congestion.

What is bizarre is that TPTB have recognised this for one small stretch of the road and banned such overtaking, but have ignored it for the rest of the road.

How does the scenario you've described cause congestion?

 

[Brandane]

Comprehension isn't your strong point, is it?

No need to start with the insults, especially when you are wrong!

To start with, both of your scenarios are illegal, read the highway code again. You are not allowed to pass on the left unless adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speed. That cannot be so when there are no other lanes of traffic in Smeggers post. They were "completely free", remember?

AND... neither of your scenarios was what Smeggers said! He makes no reference as to what lane he was in; so how can you possibly judge (on your mistaken belief) whether he was performing a legal manouevre or not?

If you're in the inside (left hand) lane and you pass a driver in the middle lane, you do not commit an offence.

If you are in the middle lane and undertake another driver in the middle lane by using the inside lane, then you are not complying with the Highway Code.

But the latter is not what Smeggers said...

 

[Over The Hill]

Three things on this-
There is stupidly sitting in the middle lane when there is no other traffic - if there is no other traffic then what is the problem here? You have one more lane to use to overtake if you feel the need to.
Generally in normal traffic, the middle lane hogger wants to go faster than the traffic in lane 1 but is reluctant to go back to lane one when a gap is there simply because the gits in the middle lane will then not let him back out again.
Lastly, If I am doing 70 in the middle lane should I really have to be pushed out the way and be deemed in the wrong by someone wanting to do 80? How is it they are OK and accepted but I am then deemed a menace?

 

[Brandane]

But you do not necessarily commit an offence (which is why there is no corresponding offence listed for Section 268 as per other sections of the Highway Code. If you think there is a specific offence of undertaking/overtaking on the left then please post a link to the offence).

[QUOTE 2488544, member: 30090"]It ain't illegal to undertake in this country. It's advisable against doing it but this does not make it illegal.[/quote]


There is no specific offence, in the same way that there is no specific offence for hogging the middle lane. There is however section 2 and section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 which deal with reckless driving (section 2) or in the case of section 3, "driving without due care and attention, OR without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road". These acts cover a multitude of sins and mean that there is no need for specific offences to cover every bit of stupidity seen on the road.

 

[Brandane]

If you're saying it's illegal what is the offence that is commited? Please provide the link to that offence to back up your assertion.

Post #60

Link as requested.
And a link to a lawyers firm if you want it too.

 

[ThinAir]

There is no specific offence, in the same way that there is no specific offence for hogging the middle lane. There is however section 2 and section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 which deal with reckless driving (section 2) or in the case of section 3, "driving without due care and attention, OR without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road". These acts cover a multitude of sins and mean that there is no need for specific offences to cover every bit of stupidity seen on the road.

+1.

This.

And remember, your will be judged against the standards of a "reasonable and a careful driver".

 

[Brandane]

So, in other words, you were wrong when you said there was an offence of undertaking...

Are you an aspiring politician, FFS?

YOU show ME where I said there was a specific offence. I said it was illegal, which it is. If you don't believe me, go out and try it in full view of Traffic Cops (if you can find any these days) and let us know the result. Meantime admit you were wrong, just for once .

 

[Brandane]

Good Lord man, are you an idiot? If it is illegal then there will be a specific legal prohibiton against it and corresponding offence.
There isn't... you're wrong... full stop.

You started with the insults, and I asked you nicely to stop. So you Sir, are either a troll, or a pub lawyer, or just a ****. I suspect the latter. You appear to know better than the lawyers firm who I gave you the link to. You also have trouble in understanding that the Highway Code is a general guide, but a guide which lays down the standards by which we are expected to drive. Drive outwith those guidelines and you can expect to be prosecuted under the offences I gave you in the Road Traffic Act. Goodbye.