Motorway question ?

[Alien8]

While we're on about driving etiquette...why don't people indicate properly anymore? Especially turning right or left at roundabouts?

Cos there are a lot of lazy, ignorant twats out there.

 

[mr_cellophane]

Non cycling

Why ?

Try this example, then tell me why it differs from previous posts.
You are cycling down a 3 lane road at about 25 mph. You approach another cyclist doing about 15, look over your shoulder and the middle lane is clear, so you signal to move out, and as you do so, a car in the outside lane doing about 40 decides they want to move into the middle lane - who has priority to move into that space ?

 

[HLaB]

Whether its law or courtesy, I always thought that you allow the car in the outside lane to move in, so they'd have priority.

 

[Linford]

Why ?

Try this example, then tell me why it differs from previous posts.
You are cycling down a 3 lane road at about 25 mph. You approach another cyclist doing about 15, look over your shoulder and the middle lane is clear, so you signal to move out, and as you do so, a car in the outside lane doing about 40 decides they want to move into the middle lane - who has priority to move into that space ?

Good point, well made

 

[Linford]

Firstly, what part of indicating does not give you priority do you not understand? Secondly, yes if he caused you to swerve to avoid a collision then he has made a mistake also, hence why I said it was 50/50 (but if an accident was avoided by your reactions then well done, take pride in your abilities). Thirdly, once you have completed an overtake you are supposed to return to the left, having an empty lane is irrelevant. The first rule of the road is drive on the left, even when you are on a multi-lane road. I'm sorry if my post came across as if I was saying you were at fault or if it sounded inappropriate in any way, you asked a question and I am merely responding. Try and ask one of the Police Officers who use this forum, they may have a different point of view to me, but they may agree.

I was given to understand after asking a driving instructor that if nobody is occupying a space in an empty lane which both have a legal right to use, but one has already indicated they are going to move into it, then the priority to do so would be given to them irrespective of whether they are coming in from the inside or outside lanes (my indicators were on, but his weren't).
That is what I'm basing my stance on. It is a logical one to take IMO.

 

[Norm]

That is what I'm basing my stance on. It is a logical one to take IMO.

Possibly, but it does make me wonder about the question which you asked in the OP...

...who has priority to move into that space ?

I agree with your position. Whatever the legal niceties, I think that the overtaking car has greater responsibility as does the car which has the situation developing in their windscreen rather than their mirrors. Also, in the situation as you describe, they probably should have anticipated your manoeuvre and left you that space.

However, as can be seen above, it isn't clear cut and there might be a bunch of other factors involved.

 

[mickle]

I don't understand why this is causing so much confusion. It's completely straightforwrd; if there is any conflict it's because the vehicle approaching from the fast lane failed to anticipate and take account of an entirely predictable event..

If the middle car had been travelling at the same speed as the leading car and had failed to indicate when it pulled into the middle lane there might be an argument. The onus of responsibility must reside with the car approaching from behind to drive only as fast as the road he knows to be clear.

 

[lulubel]

It's the responsibility of the driver in the outside lane (doing the overtaking) to only move back in when he/she is sure it is safe to do so. In this situation, it wasn't safe because there was a vehicle in the inside lane wanting to move out, which the first driver would have realised if he/she had been in possession of any brain cells, even if the vehicle in the inside lane wasn't signalling. So, the driver moving from the outside lane was in the wrong.

However, when you are moving from the inside to middle lane on the motorway, it's always best to assume that any driver coming up behind isn't in possession of any brain cells, and proceed with appropriate caution.

Indicators don't have anything to do with priority. If you're in the inside lane of a motorway and you put your right indicator on, you're just saying to other drivers, "I'd like to move to the middle lane." They can either respond to your signal by giving you room (if they can) or ignore your signal, but neither is wrong.

 

[asterix]

Non cycling, I know but i'd be interested to see another opinion on this.

You are trundling down the inside lane of a 3 lane motorway carriageway at about 70mph. You approach a car doing about 60, look in your mirror and the middle lane is clear, so you indicate to move out, and as you do so, someone in the outside lane who is doing about 80 decides they want to move into the middle lane - who has priority to move into that space ?

Being a defensive driver I wouldn't push the issue. It is quite possible they haven't noticed you (they have text to send, cd to change) so I'd slow down and tuck in at 60.

Am doing my 1200km trek to the Limousin Monday, doing that sort of distance you realise that a few mph isn't crucial and the winner is the guy who arrives in one piece!

 

[Linford]

Being a defensive driver I wouldn't push the issue. It is quite possible they haven't noticed you (they have text to send, cd to change) so I'd slow down and tuck in at 60.

Am doing my 1200km trek to the Limousin Monday, doing that sort of distance you realise that a few mph isn't crucial and the winner is the guy who arrives in one piece!

I swerved back in as he was claiming that space closed in on me and basically forced me back into the inside lane and that was the end of that. I didn't want to connect with him and instinctively moved away from that space.

My question really was to understand who has the greater obligation, and a faster car is always going to have the opportunity to occupy the space more quickly than the slower one.

 

[Linford]

The faster car has the greater obligation but it would be a particulary rubbish driver of the slower car, who took advantage and made assumptions of that oblogation.

We both agree then - mine in actions, and yours in words

 

[Archie_tect]

Well done.

 

[BC BOOTLE]

happens all day every day in the vehicle in the picture...never pull out on a vehicle travelling faster...simple

 

[Linford]

happens all day every day in the vehicle in the picture...never pull out on a vehicle travelling faster...simple

The vehicle wasn't in that lane when I started my move though.

 

[Archie_tect]

Sigh....so close.