Surely that would mean you're driving with an expectation of what other people should be doing?

You should check your mirrors and blind spots before changing lanes in *either* direction...therefore' date=' surely it doesn't matter on which side someone is overtaking you, as you will spot them and judge their pace and distance accurately before making the manouevre?

And this would apply whether they are overtaking you or not![/quote']

You shouldn't be going faster in the left lane. Are you driving expecting everyone to check their mirrors and judge 100% correctly before the manouever? I know that people don't always do this.

We will all drive with expectations, not that we should make assumptions on them, but we still expect it.

You shouldn't be going faster in the left lane. Are you driving expecting[/i'] everyone to check their mirrors and judge 100% correctly before the manouever? I know that people don't always do this.

I know you shouldn't be travelling faster in the left hand lane...unless the queue of traffic you are in is moving faster - and how many cars constitute a queue?

I'm just questioning why it's any more dangerous to overtake on the left than on the right. There seems to be some sort of implication that it's the manouevre itself which is dangerous, and therefore you will unquestionably be done for "dangerous driving" - which simply isn't the case.

Howabout if you're in lane 1, and you overtake someone in lane 3 just by virtue of travelling faster? Is that dangerous?

Rob.

It would most likely be classed as dangerous driving as the Highway code says to pass on the right. I would class a queue as 'waiting' traffic, not traffic moving freely.

Personally I think it's dangerous as people use it as a last resort. The dangers from undertaking, in my eyes, is that the driving culture is not geared towards it. You will be speeding up in a lane that has traffic moving at a relatively slower pace than you were starting from. Plus, the aforementioned fact that people will not expect it and most likely be less aware (as you said, not a danger of the actual manouever).

If everyone had perfect lane discipline and stuck to speed limits undertaking would be redundant, and this is why it isn't condoned. There's no reason for it.

Undertaking is therefore, in my eyes, dangerous as it goes against the natural flow of order on the road. If it was sudenly made 'legal' and people accepted it, then the dangers would be slightly reduced.

But my main reason for thinking it is dangerous as a manouever is that you are going faster in a lane of traffic going slower. So any distances will close quicker and reaction and thinking time is reduced. These effects are not apparrent when overtaking on the right.

Hmm lets add "filtering" by motorcyclists into the pot to make matters worse. Filtering is perfectly legal (again only in queing traffic) however if you get hit by a car changing lanes while filtering you can bet your bottom dollar the insurance claim will take a while and you may even end up in court for dangerous driving.

Back we go to the definition of what is considered "queueing" traffic. I've been on the M27 during rush hour where all three lanes were doing 70 + yet the cars were about as nose to tail as the M8 is at about 10mph :eek: Now which one is queueing again ?

The Highway Code says you may pass queuing traffic on the left, not undertake. (i read: Passing in another lane with no intention of moving into the other lane once you have passed the car(s).)

So I think the queuing traffic part is just a way out for this, if the traffic is making the outside lane unusually slow you may pass in the left hand lanes. Not pull into them to overtake and pull back.

Thats how I read the 'Queuing Traffic' part. Though it is quite ambiguous.

So I think the queuing traffic part is just a way out for this' date=' if the traffic is making the outside lane unusually slow you may pass in the left hand lanes. [i']Not[/i] pull into them to overtake and pull back.

Or the other way of approaching it...

Moving back into the left hand lane as you're no longer overtaking.

Continuing in a faster queue of traffic than that to the right, happening to pass the person in the right.

Finally, overtake the person in front in the same lane, thus moving out into the right hand lane again to do so.

Perfectly by the book if you look at it this way!

Rob.

I suppose it's down to intention really...

We have a duel carriagway that runs from near the supermarket on the outside of town, with two stretches and roundabouts at each end. At the far end from the supermarket, a roundabout exit to the right goes to a village which seems to be predominately inhabited by bad drivers. Unfortunately, my way is left at the same roundabout. Almost EVERY time I go to the shops, I am stuck behind someone who thinks that because they're turning right at the end of the duel carriageway (a good few miles), they can sit in the outside lane doing 50mph (70mph derestricted limit). . . . . even when there's no-one but me and them there! That is something I find very annoying!

As to flashing headlights, I used to do it, but I found it had little or no effect so I don't bother anymore.

We have a duel carriagway that runs from near the supermarket on the outside of town' date=' with two stretches and roundabouts at each end. At the far end from the supermarket, a roundabout exit to the right goes to a village which seems to be predominately inhabited by bad drivers. Unfortunately, my way is left at the same roundabout. Almost EVERY time I go to the shops, I am stuck behind someone who thinks that because they're turning right at the end of the duel carriageway (a good few miles), they can sit in the outside lane doing 50mph (70mph derestricted limit). . . . . even when there's no-one but me and them there! That is something I find very annoying!

As to flashing headlights, I used to do it, but I found it had little or no effect so I don't bother anymore.[/quote']

I use a similar piece of road, if a driver ignores a polite flash, followed by another, and then a two second dazzle , then the left hand lane is the only option... Sorry.

In New Zealand it's legal to overtake on the left "if it is safe to do so".

They don't have many dual carriageway roads though!

Headlamps that flash alternately left and right would be SO cool!

You can buy the kits on E-Bay (they are very effective at removing slow moving vehicles from your path)

Also having a white Superb with Xenons and extra aerials helps!!

tbh, i think that if you are 5 inches from the rear of the car you are flashing, it is probably a rude gesture and you are a obviously an objectionable person. Or if there is obviously traffic in front of me.

However, if you are maintaining a much more safe distance, then it is plain and simple a polite request, but shouldn't be necessary at all. Any driver with any nouse should already be in the correct lane.

Where's plod with the lane correction fines?!

K

Agree with what you're saying 'exFiesta' - but unfortunately in the UK people feel they must be in the most-right-hand-side lane no matter what happens/who else is on the road.

This morning someone decided to do 50mph on a 70 mph stretch, nearly causing a lorry to crash into him as a result. Then poodling along at the same speed, dropping to 45 (!!) mph going uphill. This was on the A34 at about 6am. Not good. I just dropped my car into the slow lane & waited for the t*sser to move + the lorry to get less annoyed before going back up to NSL and going past.

M4 a bit later on was a typical example again - range rover in 3rd lane, some other car in middle lane, I was joining the motorway. Fortunately I was able to get past both before I 'hit' the M4 so wasn't undertaking but I have a feeling, based on people blaring horns, flashing lights, that this person in the 3rd lane was causing a few aggrevations. Obviously the driver involved felt he was entitled to be a royal PITB.

I've not seen much lane discipline here for a long time :(

flashing headlights is soo rude and is a fundemental part of road rage.... and even if it isn't meant to be, it ALWAYS is looked upon as rude. It probably makes people want to slow and stay in same lane.

i drive into sheffield in the rush hour. there a couple of dual carriage ways followed by queing traffic. I dont see the point speeding ahead just to be ahead by 1 or 2 cars ahead in the queue. most days you see people fly by miles before the queue and then 10 minutes later you pass them in the slow lane. I give them a nice cheesy smile on the way past.

cutting into queues and speeding flashing your lights etc in rush hour get you no where.

my opinion don't threat!

I've not seen much lane discipline here for a long time :(

Lane discipline at 3am seems to be pretty good ... ahhh, the joys of having a baby

Chris

flashing headlights is soo rude and is a fundemental part of road rage.... and even if it isn't meant to be, it ALWAYS is looked upon as rude. It probably makes people want to slow and stay in same lane.

Not where I live - a couple of short flashes to alert someone to your presence doesn't anger them and I'll thank them as I go passed. The thank you is usually acknowledged. Aggressive driving is rude and a fundamental part of road rage though!

Chris

i really hate lane hoggers when there is no need for it, but i never flash my lights unless they are really just taking the p***. as for letting people pass for flashing theirs, tho im rarely on the motorway, i let them pass if i need to.

I find that lane discipline in this country has gone to the dogs , and yes I do find the need to flash / undertake at times , as a last resort . I will try all kinds of other things first , using right indicator, altering my position in my lane ( creates movement in their mirror which might just attract attention if they are day dreaming ..) driving with lights on (not beam ) but not getting too close to them ( otherwise they cant see lights !) .........

Over-riding memory is from about 20 years ago, in the Estelle rally car doing about 90 on the M'way, flashing main beam at BMW in L3 to move nothing in L1 and L2 ... no reaction .... flicked switch and gave him main beam AND 4 x 120 Cibie Super Oscars .... he leapt right across to L1, and had such a look of shock on his face when he saw it was a Skoda ...... heh heh ...

Indicating right's the key, but did you know that it's not actually illegal to undertake (not including the hard shoulder Jimmy )? it's considered dangerous driving if you cause an accident, but that's it

Indicating right's the key, but did you know that it's not actually illegal to undertake (not including the hard shoulder Jimmy )? it's considered dangerous driving if you cause an accident, but that's it

It's in the Highway code that you can pass on the left if a queue of traffic on the right is moving slower than your lane. So technically, dependant on the officers definition of 'a queue', you could be on dodgy ground whether you cause an accident or not.

I would see undertaking as more rude than flashing. As someone mentioned a few posts back, if you flash at a safe distance then it's not being aggressive. However being right up close flashing can be rather aggressive.

if I was in the right lane overtaking a queue of slow drivers @40mph in a 40 mph zone and then someone flies up behind me and start flashing me with thier lights then i will make no effort to go any faster especially over the speed limit. it makes me smile to see them get angry when this happens, but i realise i am not in the wrong at all and it is them that has issues. Drivers these days need to open up thier eyes and think of other people when driving.

these days there are too many idiots on the road. I wish they upped the legal age to drive to 21. Also like motor bikes they should make people drive for a certain amount of time in cars that have a maximum engine of say 1.2 size or even maximum insurance group rating of say 3 (only for example).

it would make the roads safer and would cut the amount of drivers on the road.

thats my opinion.

Technology exists to map lanes with cameras, so if someone is sitting in the middle lane and there is clearly nothing they are overtaking then in theory they could be detected and reported. Believe it was being tried in Europe somewhere.

Who knows with their addiction to speed camera installs they might be used eventually. Course it doesnt help that the highway code labels the lanes normal driving, fast normal driving and overtaking, instead of normal driving and two overtaking lanes, or something.

Not that it matters for the majority of the dumbass middle lane hoggers, mind :(

chris_newell41: Would it work by making the standard of driving higher? Maybe increasing the test in quality, and retesting people over 65 every two years? I know theres no way my grandad shouldnt be driving!

Also think a motorway test should unlock the motorways to new drivers. Something like the L-test enables you to drive on roads, but to drive on motorways you need passplus or something. That kinda thing.

Actually, the right most lane (left here) is never supposed to be occupied, but only used for overtaking only. So if you're driving on the fast lane, it's always best bet to have the corresponding indicator on. I flash drivers alot, but that's because I'm always overtaking, and they're always driving on the fast lane at well below the speed limit.

Having said that' date='with a silver vRS (in fact a few) patrolling the motorways,its amazing how many people get out of the way/slow down when I go down the motorway.[/quote']

I can tell you that it's even better whilst wearing a hi-viz jacket on the way to work! :D

I think it depends on the scenario.

Deserted m'way at night (m6 ) with someone 200+ yards in front of you in the outside lane, then I'd flash once and hope they woke up and moved over.

M25 just after rush hour, not quite tailgating but wanting to make progress... Give 'em a minute or two, then put the RH indicator on.

J.