Speeding on a motorway

[NVP]

I'll take it anyway I can get it

 

[jimmy321]

Without reading the rest of the thread the comments about lanes in the USA does not apply in the UK as there are exits/entries on either side in the US whereas it's mostly exit/entry on the left had side in the UK (I only know of one right hand entry/exit in Glasgow)

 

[jimmy321]

Isn't it also true that in the US, an exit slip can be on either side of the carriageway?* So it makes sense to encourage drivers to spread out across the lanes because they may need to do so anyway to exit the highway.

Whereas in the UK, where we almost always exit the motorway to the left, it makes sense to make the left hand lane the primary lane for driving in, while the other two lanes are intended for overtaking only, for faster moving traffic that intends to remain on the motorway for a longer distance.

*Think my sister told me it's like this from her road trip last year, I've never visited the US so correct me if I'm wrong.

Should have read the thread lol

 

[Sasso]

Poor people should not be allowed cars and certainly not allowed to use the 2 FAST lanes! They have their own lane labeled bus

hahahaha!!! XD


mmmm yes......quite.... *sips brandy*

 

[Clarkey]

n/m

 

[( |-| |2 ][ $]

Correct me where I'm wrong but there's no specific law about undertaking.
The highway code states "do not" rather "must not", to be convicted you'd need to be swapping lanes / swerving at speed and showing a bad standard of driving so you can be done for careless driving.

Undertaking a 70mph lane 3 driver via lane 1 at 80 is never going to be punishable?

 

[Vanilla]

Correct me where I'm wrong but there's no specific law about undertaking.
The highway code states "do not" rather "must not", to be convicted you'd need to be swapping lanes / swerving at speed and showing a bad standard of driving so you can be done for careless driving.

Undertaking a 70mph lane 3 driver via lane 1 at 80 is never going to be punishable?

This is what I thought on both accounts. HW code says 'do not'.

Also there is a difference between passing on the left and undertaking. I always thought it was only undertaking if you pass on the left and then take the middle lane.

Just like it being overtaking when you pass on the right and move into the middle lane. The 'move into the lane' being the key.

 

[Hagar]

At OP the indicated speed on the speedometer must have been north of 105mph.

I got a letter from Dumfries and Galloway claiming I was clocked at 95mph on the M74 (mid morning on a Friday, zero traffic, heading south) some years back.

I was offered three points and a fixed penalty fine of £60 which I accepted and plead guilty by post. Thought it was reasonable although I do not recollect the speedo exceeding 100mph indicated.

 

[Kenai]

This is what I thought on both accounts. HW code says 'do not'.

Also there is a difference between passing on the left and undertaking. I always thought it was only undertaking if you pass on the left and then take the middle lane.

Just like it being overtaking when you pass on the right and move into the middle lane. The 'move into the lane' being the key.

There is no difference as far as the highway code is concerned.

The only circumstance in which it suggests passing on the left/undertaking/whatever to be acceptable is in congested/heavy traffic when lanes will be at different speeds and everyone constantly trying to swap or refusing to pass the lane to the right would cause chaos.

As for the do not / must not, whilst it means the act may not be a specific offence, if everyone just gayly ignored anything that isn't a 'must not' the roads would be utter chaos

 

[Skilid]

As far as I am aware, the only time you are 'allowed' to pass on the left is when the motorway is splitting, for instance with 4 lanes the first two exit and the other 2 continue. You can then overtake using the second lane if someone in the third is going slowly, because technically you're exiting and they are not.

From a personal perspective if I am in lane 1 and I am catching someone in lane 2, if there is space to do so I will go out to lane 3 just to make a point, but if there is traffic in lane 3 I will stay in lane 1 and pass on the left. IMO this is not 'undertaking' as I haven't changed lanes to complete the manoeuvre.

 

[Phantom Shadow]

Correct me where I'm wrong but there's no specific law about undertaking.
The highway code states "do not" rather "must not", to be convicted you'd need to be swapping lanes / swerving at speed and showing a bad standard of driving so you can be done for careless driving.

Undertaking a 70mph lane 3 driver via lane 1 at 80 is never going to be punishable?

Did they not bring in a fine for undertaking?

Although I think you'd usually have to be swerving between lanes to get picked up for undertaking someone. If you are going along in lane 1 at 70 and happen to drive past someone doing 60 in lane 2 for no reason I would be pretty surprised to get a fine for it.

 

[Kaeo]

I don't think that really counts as undertaking anyway. You're in the correct lane doing the speed limit. If someone is in the overtaking lane going under the speed limit, having to go slower in the left lane seems a bit silly.

 

[Sin_Chase]

I assume the traffic officer still has a some input into this. If you were clocked at 97mph he/she could surely just report that you were doing 85mph if they believed you didn't deserve the full punishment a 97mph conviction would give you.

No.

because that would be a lie and totally undermine one of the guiding principles of being a cop - Honest/Integrity and a good set of morals.

What you are suggesting would be instant dismissal.

 

[Richie]

Have I? You can't have an exit road to the right on our system because of the other motorway direction. Just wondered how they do that in the US.

There are instances of right had exit roads on Motorways in the UK.

 

[ubersonic]

traditionally it would be up to the officer whether they would issue a FPN, offer a speed awareness course or summons to court, albeit with guidelines. This has now changed and disposal decisions are decided centrally which means the officer no longer had discretion on what to offer. So in my scenario, you would get a summons to court, no ifs or buts.

To be honest it's always worked like that round here anyway, "officers digression" sounds good in theory but when it actually translates too "officer can do what he wants but has to justify action to superiour and will get rectum chewed out for not being as strict as possible" then its something of a moot point.

When you have done a bit more motorway driving and see the problems this causes you will think back to this comment and think "what a silly sod I was back then"

To be fair anybody who has done a lot of motorway driving knows the middle lane hogging issue is not the real issue, its a symptom of the issue, the real issue is people being unable to use the left lane because they know if they do some idiot will try to pass them and not bother moving over if they need to get out.

As far as I am aware, the only time you are 'allowed' to pass on the left is when the motorway is splitting

It's allowed whenever the lane to the right slow down but yours does not, causing cars in those lanes to lose speed and you to pass them.

 

[jimmy321]

There are instances of right had exit roads on Motorways in the UK.

About 2 or 3?

 

[jigger]

So you're speeding on a motorway and you're pulled over by a marked traffic unit. The officer tells you that he recorded you doing 97mph. What would you expect the punishment to be?

My first thought was *Whatever the Bobby see's fit*

97mph on an empty motorway at 1am is completely different to 97mph in 9am rush-hour traffic.

Looks like the punishment will now probably be the same in most cases. Once people know it's just going to go one way or another I can't see much point in listening to anything the Police have to say.

If the Police can't use discretion I might as well just say " Give me the ticket you Muppet! " and get on with my journey ASAP.

 

[kefkef]

I was caught on the M62 in 2004 doing 97mph, 6pm'ish. Got a right rollicking and shown a number of crash pictures where people had died from excess speed, 3 points and £60. He did also have me on camera on the same run doing 117, but it was outside the range of the camera for it to be carte blanche acceptable in court, but if I didn't accept the 3 points and £60 he would be willing to go to court for the day to have a go at proving it.

All in, he was a decent bloke, was funny when he was asking me how fast I was going, err 75 officer, nope, err 80 office, nope, err 85 officer, nope, err 90 officer, nope, err 95 officer, nope and if you aren't truthful I'll do you for undue care and attention, err could be anything over 95 really I was concentrating on the road not the speedo.

I knew I had been an idiot and have never really hammered it since then, keep it to 85 max if i'm late, but I now plan my journeys better and leave in plenty of time.

 

[Kenai]

It's allowed whenever the lane to the right slow down but yours does not, causing cars in those lanes to lose speed and you to pass them.

In slowly moving queues, yes:

stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left

Not in 70mph traffic because you happen to be doing 85mph in the left lane though, as many people seem to recall this particular passage as saying.

 

[SlyReaper]

Did they not bring in a fine for undertaking?

If there's a fine for undertaking, there should also be a fine for the other driver for middle lane hogging. Undertaking isn't possible unless the person you're passing is middle lane hogging. Or fast lane hogging, but that's rarer.