Lane hogging

[Silver_Shiney]

What does everyone think of this report?

Personally, I think it is good in theory but next to impossible to implement. Something needs to be done about the fools who stay in the middle lane and/or intimidate other drivers by ignoring the "two second rule"

[Kendhni]

This was announced a while back and I thought it was a good idea ... why clutter up our courts with what is mainly trivial offences when an on the spot fine would do just as well. The problem is that the courts are likely to become cluttered up with 'appeals' or charges of police harrassment.

As long as the Chief Constables use it as a means of improving road safety and not an easy way of meeting targets (like they do with speeding .. if below target then send out a couple of officers with a hairdryer).


BTW, I htink it is long overdue that using a handheld mobile phone while driving should result in an immediate loss of licence ... it is about as acceptable as drink driving .. but yet many still do it.

[david63]

I agree that these are going to be very difficult to enforce - let's be honest the police cannot even enforce the (ab)use of mobile phones when driving.

The one thing that concerns me about some of these new rules is that they can be subjective - what one person's view of driving too close may not be that of another, and no doubt the police will have a third view on the matter.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Use of mobile phones when driving.

I notice in company vans one sees this a lot including smoking in such a vehicle too, which is in contravention of smoking in an enclosed workspace, followed by chucking empty fag packet on to my driveway whilst they speed through the 30mph lane at 40+mph.

A police officer and an EHO working together good gain a lot of useful income for the police authority and the borough council here by adopting a zero-tolerance policy and force the asocial to comply with laws.

[Stephen]

What does everyone think of this report?

Personally, I think it is good in theory but next to impossible to implement. Something needs to be done about the fools who stay in the middle lane and/or intimidate other drivers by ignoring the "two second rule"

A bazooka normal does the trick

[Kendhni]

.... or a supercharged snow plough

[Silver_Shiney]

I agree that these are going to be very difficult to enforce - let's be honest the police cannot even enforce the (ab)use of mobile phones when driving.

The one thing that concerns me about some of these new rules is that they can be subjective - what one person's view of driving too close may not be that of another, and no doubt the police will have a third view on the matter.

That one is very simple - use the "two second rule", it works for any speed.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Two seconds is a minimum.

it should be longer when at higher speeds AND when surface conditions/grip are compromised, such as rain, rain after a long dry spell (especially treacherous), frost, ice and snow , visibility, avoiding "two or three in the bed" when safe to do so and 'near, far, rear' observation noting potential hazards other than just the driver in front.

[Mervyn and Trish]

It's well overdue for decent driving standards to be policed and enforced. For many what is the law is treated as optional.

One clear example is that many drivers now seem to believe that speed limits only apply for 50 yards either side of speed cameras.

Another is the way people whinge about "stealth taxes" when they are caught speeding. If you break the law, expect the penalty.

I've only been done twice for speeding in my many years on the road (my only motoring offences, other than one parking ticket) and in both cases it was my own stupid fault and I was guilty as charged, even though both times I could argue I was posing no danger to anyone.

[Keechy]

I totally agree with handheld 'phone argument - it's a big NO-NO.

However, the lane hogging could be contentious. Does this mean that when I go down to Southampton in a couple of weeks, I'll be confined to speed of the slowest lorry because if I overtake, I may be forced into a situation where I can't get back into lane 1? Or do I dodge in and out of lane 1 where possible. Lane hoggers are those who pootle along in lane 2 at less than the max limit. Lane 3 will remain pristine because no-one will need to use it.

There's the other rule about 'Not yielding at road junctions. (Not causing another vehicle to take avoiding action)' What's that all about?

Rant over

[Delboy]

Motorways are currently the safest roads in the UK, I don't how the new penalties for lane hogging are going to improve the situation, I think they will make it worse.

It is going to cause a heck of a lot more interchanging of lanes, the inside lane is often congested with slower moving traffic such as lorries and caravans etc. if middle lane is clear in front, what's the problem staying in that lane at say 70 mph, and just moving in to the inside lane when somebody wants to over take, although the person overtaking would be breaking the speed limit.

I can see a lot of drivers refusing paying the fixed penalty and wanting to take it to court, or cluttering up the driver aware courses, which my DIL said were a waste of time when she chose to attend one, rather than points on the licence.

Also more and more our roads are cluttered up with the average speed cameras, which cause more congestion and traffic hold ups on our roads than anything else, and you are not supposed to change lanes, where they are in force.

[david63]

Not directly related but this is interesting

[Quizzical Bob]

It is going to cause a heck of a lot more interchanging of lanes, the inside lane is often congested with slower moving traffic such as lorries and caravans etc. if middle lane is clear in front, what's the problem staying in that lane at say 70 mph, and just moving in to the inside lane when somebody wants to over take, although the person overtaking would be breaking the speed limit.

The problem is that it turns a three-lane motorway into a two-lane one. The Highway Code is quite clear about this, section 264: 'You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear'.

(Lorries and caravans are restricted to 60mph on motorways and are not permitted in the third lane. Please respect and understand their situation).

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Following a momentary lapse of concentration on a dark and wet night I drove into a stationery line of traffic and was charged with careless driving but was offered driving training (at my expense) or fines and points.

I was proceeding down a dual carriage-way with a 40 limit and was drving at that speed in the overtaking lane having just joined after exiting from a full turn a around a roundabout. Just before passing a car in the inside lane I had a tailgate flashing me who presumably wanted to proceed down the lane in excess of the speed limit. As soon as I was clear of the car I was passing I indicated to turn in but regretably I had failed to notice a long stationery line of vehicles ahead in the inside lane and was about one cars length away from the next vehicle ahead when I saw the queue.

I took the driver training course and found the instructors (ex traffic police) and the course material highly interesting. Most drivers felt that they "shouldn't be here" but they were soon put straight by the instructors.

'Cause and Blame' scenarios were very interesting and turned on the head many pre-concieved notions about some of the drivers present who "thought they were not to blame"

In my scenario although I have clearly culpability in the accident it was interesting that the instructors also pointed out that had a driver at the end of a stationery queue retained his foot on the brake pedal the accident may have been avoided, likewise tailgating and inappropriate use of headlamp flashing by another driver may have contributed to me making a poor decision to move into the inside lane.

Needless to say whenever I am at the end of a stationery traffic queue I now always keep my foot on the brake until I move off or another driver has queued behind me.

Another one is that most people present thought that a motrocyclist overtaking a vehicle who is indicating that he is turning right and then crashed into the vehicle as it made its turn was at fault. No, as far as the ex.police were concerned. Had the car driver checked his wing mirror and blind spot before turning he would have seen and let the idiot motorcyclist pass. In the instructor's view there was shared culpability.

An interesting course.

I think all drivers should go on these courses every 5 or 10 years for a reduced fee (if no offence has been committed) or asap at full cost when being charged with speeding and other offences that attract fixed penalties and points.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Motorways are indeed the safest roads for number of miles driven.

The lane with the highest fatality rate and serious injury is the hard shoulder.

The type of 'road' that enjoys the most insurance claims (no of claims - not value) are car parks (supermarkets, council, NCP, etc).

[Delboy]

It is going to cause a heck of a lot more interchanging of lanes, the inside lane is often congested with slower moving traffic such as lorries and caravans etc. if middle lane is clear in front, what's the problem staying in that lane at say 70 mph, and just moving in to the inside lane when somebody wants to over take, although the person overtaking would be breaking the speed limit.

The problem is that it turns a three-lane motorway into a two-lane one. The Highway Code is quite clear about this, section 264: 'You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear'.

(Lorries and caravans are restricted to 60mph on motorways and are not permitted in the third lane. Please respect and understand their situation).

Firstly I always respect and understand lorries and caravans, in fact I Show respect to every driver on the road, I would be a fool not to.

You mention the highway codes states you should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear, I agree, but that is very often the problem on motorways, the road ahead on the inside lane is not clear due to the slow moving traffic in that lane.

These new laws are going to mean a lot more inter weaving between the inside and middle lane, especially by those who are driving at the maximum speed allowed on motorways even when The road ahead in the middle lane is clear. in my view this will now cause far more problems than inter weaving between the middle and outside lanes. The problem with middle lane road hogging and even outside lane hogging, is not those drivers driving at 70 mph, its the drivers who hog them at 55 mph, and in some cases 30 mph.

I am all for fining tailgaters at whatever speed, but I can see nothing wrong at travelling at speed in the middle lane when the road is clear, and the inside lane is travelling at a much slower speed, and as I said in my earlier post if somebody is trying to overtake you, when you are driving at 70, they will be breaking the speed limit.

[Quizzical Bob]

Sorry, when you said 'the road is clear' I took it to mean that it was empty. I suppose you meant 'the lane was clear'. It causes more of a problem on two-lane roads of course. It's not our job to police the roads, if others wish to drive faster that is up to them, but always remember that what your speedometer shows as 70 may be just over 60mph.

[oldbluefox]

As QB says part of the problem with middle lane hoggers is the fact they think they are travelling at 70mph but because of the inaccuracy of motor car tachometers they may actually only be doing 66mph. On a long journey south I usually use a Sat Nav which gives a truer speed recording and there can be a substantial difference in speed from car to car.
Irrespective of what speed you are doing you should only use the middle lane for overtaking purposes. Invariably a three lane motorway is reduced to two lanes, with the inside lane virtually empty because of poor motorway lane discipline. I applaud the measures and hope they are implemented.

[Quizzical Bob]

Yes OBF, they only need to be within 10% at 30mph. In my experience most cars under-read by about 5mph at 60mph, but like all legal speed enforcement measures they force you to drive with your eyes on the instruments whereas most responsible drivers adjust their speed to the road conditions and o the perceived dangers.

[Delboy]

Sorry, when you said 'the road is clear' I took it to mean that it was empty. I suppose you meant 'the lane was clear'. It causes more of a problem on two-lane roads of course. It's not our job to police the roads, if others wish to drive faster that is up to them, but always remember that what your speedometer shows as 70 may be just over 60mph.

No problem, interesting you mention the difference in the speedometer and the speed you are actually travelling at, I notice there is a difference of about 5 mph, between the sat nav and the speedometer, the speedometer reading the highest.

If the inside lane is virtually empty then yes you should always use it, but if it means you are going to be weaving in and out to the middle lane to overtake every 5 minutes due to slow moving traffic on the inside, then I think it its safer to remain in the middle especially if that is clear and you are travelling at speed, and just dropping to the inside when somebody wishes to overtake.

[Silver_Shiney]

I totally agree with handheld 'phone argument - it's a big NO-NO.

You'd have loved the prat I've just seen - elbow on window sill, right hand clamping phone to right lughole, left hand on steering wheel with burning cigarette between fingers, crossing a staggered junction, takes left hand off wheel to flick ash out of open window.

[Delboy]

What interests me and this may be something to do with the cars actually speed compared to what the speedometer reads, Is when I am at the stated speed of say 50mph, where you have the average speed camera controls, the number of cars who overtake you, especially on the dreaded M25, the worst motorway in the country.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Silver Shiney

As above, daily sight in my village, at speed coming around a blind corner on the wrong side of the road.

[Dancing Queen]

I totally agree with handheld 'phone argument - it's a big NO-NO.

You'd have loved the prat I've just seen - elbow on window sill, right hand clamping phone to right lughole, left hand on steering wheel with burning cigarette between fingers, crossing a staggered junction, takes left hand off wheel to flick ash out of open window.

And not a police car in sight ... I'll bet

[Silver_Shiney]

Well, you know what they say, Jo - never a cop around when you need one!