Why can't people understand roadworks?

[Lum]

So few people seem to understand merge in turn.

With regards to people driving in the middle lane, if the motorway is empty apart from a car in the middle lane, and I'm catching up in the first lane, can I go past without moving out?

I was having a chat with a traffic copper about this one a few years back (no I hadn't been pulled over, I have a few police customers)

Apparently he'd taken a case to court for someone doing that and lost (magistrates court, so non-binding) the magistrate told him that if you can move over to the left without cutting someone up, go past at a normal 70 mph and move out without getting dangerously close to a vehicle in front and without cutting up the MLM then the manoeuvre is safe and the correct cause of action is for the copper to pull over the MLM and do them for driving without due care and attention.

In your case you aren't even changing lanes to go past the MLM. I know the exact situation you mean, encounter it from time to time when night driving. I just stay in the lane and carry on as if they wern't there.

For a fun game, try to time it with someone who is overtaking them in L3 at the same time, and aim it so that you both appear in the MLM's field of vision at the same time. That usually wakes them up and makes them move into L1.

 

[iaind]

I'd consider cruising past someone on the inside lane as passing on the inside. Of course sounding your horn constantly as you pass is a safety measure is sensible

If theres a queue of traffic thats actually overtaking, you get fed up and move past some of them in the inside lane before cutting back into the outside lane, thats an undertake

 

[peige]

Someone willl be along soon to tell you those people were just filtering in and using all the lanes, so your wrong for not letting them in.
At least that seems to be the general view here

 

[GeForce]

Of course sounding your horn constantly as you pass is a safety measure is sensible

the magistrate told him that if you can move over to the left without cutting someone up, go past at a normal 70 mph and move out without getting dangerously close to a vehicle in front and without cutting up the MLM then the manoeuvre is safe and the correct cause of action is for the copper to pull over the MLM and do them for driving without due care and attention.

That's very interesting, thanks for that. Seems to be a bit of a grey area perhaps. I'm never quite sure what to do in these situations.

I suppose if, as you say, you give them more than enough room you could argue against dangerous driving, as you have clearly taken care to ensure your maneuver was safe.

 

[iaind]

I think the main grey area is about visibility on that side and the expectation of someone being there.

I guess if you're seeing doing it its going to be down to the copper that sees you doing it, if he thinks youre being dangerous then he'll probably tell you so. But on a completely empty road I cant see it.

Had one today, coming down telegraph hill (long steep hill on a dual carriageway) and an old coot was sitting in a civic with his brake lights on all the way down the hill in the outside lane, overtaking no one. I got to a straight bit at the bottom and passed him on the inside - when he flashed and gestured at me

 

[Janesy B]

People doing 30 on sliproads and sit on the middle lane should be shot on sight.

 

[Lum]

That's very interesting, thanks for that. Seems to be a bit of a grey area perhaps. I'm never quite sure what to do in these situations.

Just bear in mind here, that this was a magistrate, and thus it's not case law, it's not a precident and if in your case you happen to get a grumpy, 90 year old, libdem-voting, car-hating magistrate you'll probably end up with points for dangerous driving

I think the main grey area is about visibility on that side and the expectation of someone being there.

That is part of the argument for a dangerous driving charge when doing this. It's worth noting, however, that if the car has foreign plates you can use this as part of your argument as to why it was safe.

Someone willl be along soon to tell you those people were just filtering in and using all the lanes, so your wrong for not letting them in.
At least that seems to be the general view here

Did you actually read the OP?

Think about it for one minute. If everyone did it properly and just stayed in their damn lane until the merge point, there would be no "storming past the queue and barging in" because that lane would be just as full as the others. But no idiots just read the sign and without actually putting any thought into what they're doing or what the sign really means, move across to the back of the queue. It's a very British way of doing things but it's still wrong.

Edit:

http://www.iam.org.uk/pressroom/newsarchive/News+relese+28+September+2007.htm

NEW HIGHWAY CODE COULD HELP CUT CONGESTION

Roadworks misery and the congestion that goes with them could be radically reduced, according to the IAM ( Institute of Advanced Motorists ), if UK motorists take on board new advice in the Highway Code published today (28 September 2007).

For the first time, the Highway Code has a rule on “merging in turn” under the section on lane discipline (Rule 134; Highway Code 2007).

“We are pleased to see this as we believe it will ease many pinchpoints at roadworks,” said IAM Chief Examiner Peter Rodger.

“Too often we see a long, empty lane leading up to roadworks, doing nothing, because drivers have been told to get in lane too early. Then there is a tension with people perceived as ‘pushing in’. The new recommendation to merge in turn in the Highway Code will encourage drivers to use all the available lanes – right up to the lane closure - and could make roadworks less of a problem,” he said.

“It will avoid frustration and mean everybody gets through the restriction that much quicker.”

Mr Rodger, a former Metropolitan Police driving instructor, said that the IAM had long campaigned for merge in turn recognition in the Highway Code.

“We are convinced everybody will get through sooner if they merge in turn. If drivers try it, encouraged by the Highway Code, it could be the end to the ‘I’m first, you’re next’ attitude that slows everybody down.

“We now need to see this initiative supported by physical ‘merge in turn’ roadside signs as well, because we know many drivers don’t bother with the Highway Code once they have passed their test.”

There, the IAM have been saying it for years, and now the Highway Code says it too.

 

[GeForce]

Just bear in mind here, that this was a magistrate, and thus it's not case law

Yep I understand that. Interesting to hear what's happened to other people in similar situations though

 

[Fido McNasty]

Anticipation on the part of all drivers would go a long way to easing merging problems. Three lanes going into two or one is I'm pretty sure going to be just as much of a hold up wherever the traffic merges. The point that should be addressed imho is drivers who fail to let merging traffic in to their lane, thus causing the merging traffic to either end up halting completely or having to 'bully' thier way in. It's all about momentum, and I don't understand why it's so difficult for certain selfish drivers not to be able to understand that.

 

[peige]

Did you actually read the OP?

Yes

 

[Glaucus]

Three lanes going into two or one is I'm pretty sure going to be just as much of a hold up wherever the traffic merges.

Nope you are forgetting junctions behind you.
Say three lanes are going into 1 lane.
If it says merge in turn 200 yards ahead. Then by all merging into one lane at that 200 yard sign. You increase the que from 200 yards long to 600 yards long and as such block up junctions behind, meaning traffic wanting to go on it's merry way in another direction. Now gets blocked at that junction.

 

[Fido McNasty]

Nope you are forgetting junctions behind you.
Say three lanes are going into 1 lane.

Just mentally roll that into what I wrote before.

 

[Booner!]

I am in the crowd of people that believe that you should NOT fly up the right hand lane and then merge in. It is what causes everyone in the left lane to stop start. Frustrating really, as you wouldn't do the same in the queue for shopping?

That's my take on it, whether I am right or wrong is another matter

 

[Glaucus]

I am in the crowd of people that believe that you should NOT fly up the right hand lane and then merge in. It is what causes everyone in the left lane to stop start. Frustrating really, as you wouldn't do the same in the queue for shopping?

That's my take on it, whether I am right or wrong is another matter

so you like ignoring signs, causing traffic jams and being annoying. Cars HAVE to merge somewhere as such it will cause start stopping.

 

[iaind]

Theres a difference between flying up the outside lane and cutting someone up at the last minute, and using a sensible amount of the lane and merging safely

 

[Glaucus]

Theres a difference between flying up the outside lane and cutting someone up at the last minute, and using a sensible amount of the lane and merging safely

Those things are not linked. What people classify as flying up the outside lane. Is still below the speed limit and is perfectly legal. It is the fools who all merge early who should be prosecuted. The amount of traffic jams it causes is huge and a massive problem.

 

[iaind]

A lot of people merging at the last minute, or even sitting stopped waiting to merge, are caused by stubborn people on the inside lane not wanting to let people merge, so it a 2 way process

 

[BigglesPiP]

A friend has seen a 5 series run up to the end and try to cut in on the A34, many years ago. Everyone suddenly drives bumper to bumper. Driver of the van behind starts shaking a can of coke, then pulls the ring pull and throws it through the open window of the BMW.

Sticky foamy coke everywhere, and an unhappy sales rep steps out dripping wet.

 

[K1LLSW1TCH]

Yeah, I've currently got this on my way to work. I can either:

1) Use the left-hand lane and sit in a queue for a mile or

2) Use the right lane and do the mile at normal pace before merging in turn.

Obviously I choose option 2 every time, and usually get looked at by all those in the left lane with the kind of disgust normally reserved for paedophiles. This morning was all the more exciting when some **** decided he was a traffic officer and proceeded to try to stop me from going down the right lane by straddling his MINI across both lanes. Fortunately he failed to realise that his car isn't particularly wide, and I had space to squeeze passed.

If you're in Newport (Wales) Would that be the road by the Ashbridge and the Waterloo by any chance?

 

[Meatball]

People who call an overtaking lane the 'middle lane' and the people who use said 'middle lane' when there is nobody in the 1st lane, thereby forcing other road users to come out of the first lane to overtake them in the 2nd lane by using the 3rd lane.

That really grinds my gears . On the A40 I notice a lot of drivers are scared of using the inside lane completely, leaving the 2nd and 3rd congested and the 1st lane free to travel down!

Am I right thinking you can go past them on the inside lane as long as you don't pull in front of them straight away, thus not
"undertaking?"