Motorway middle-lane hoggers to face on-the-spot fines

[Dave *]

That's overly dramatic.

Anyone of those people would have sirens or begin flashing, hooting and gesturing in which case you would realise they needed to pass and move out the way :nono:

You don't get it, it's none of your business. You have no right to try and slow a person down, they were just examples, a person might have any reason for doing so.

Until you lobby parliament to give you an exemption you have no right or power to break the law and try to rationalise it by some juvenile idea of how you are stopping people speeding :shake:.

 

[joescrivens]

I'm not against this law at all. People break laws every day though with traffic offences. Hogging the middle lane is no worse than someone going 85 when they don't need to be.

 

[Dave *]

I'm not against this law at all. People break laws every day though with traffic offences. Hogging the middle lane is no worse than someone going 85 when they don't need to be.

Except there is never a reason to hog the middle lane, while there might well be a valid excuse for the speeding. So your comparison is wrong.

Stop trying to justify yourself.

 

[joescrivens]

Except there is never a reason to hog the middle lane, while there might well be a valid excuse for the speeding. So your comparison is wrong.

Well I disagree, but no point in going round in circles.

I'm out, I shall bare this new law in mind and keep an eye out for the police and also try to adhere to the rule a lot more so as not to risk a fine.

 

[Dave *]

I'm out, I shall bare this new law in mind and keep an eye out for the police and also try to adhere to the rule a lot more so as not to risk a fine.

Just keep left, pass right and you don't have to watch out for the police .

 

[SpikeK6]

Hogging the middle lane is not about "doing the speed limit so i am ok" or "just one more truck three miles down the road to over take so i will stay in this lane till I pass" its about the flow of traffic.

How many times do you see the 2 outside lanes jam packed but he inner lane is free for many 100's of yards when its perfectly safe to pull into??

Middle lane hoggers upset the balance of what a motorway is all about, free flowing fast traffic. Ok m25 and a few other motorways excluded ha ha!!!

I have driven many many 1000's of miles in europe and very rarely do you see someone just sitting in the middle lane with nothing else around him/her. speeding is becoming a thing of the past, and probably quite a few other offences, why?? I think its because they police it properly, you break the law its a 130 euro on the spot fine, you aint got the money they take you to a cash point, you still not gto the money your car/bike is impouned till you do.

Some might see this as unfair but if it gets people driving properly and thinking of others and not just themselves for once then surely its a good thing

 

[andya700]

This sums the problem up - "I'm doing 70 therefore I can stay in the middle lane, why are all those idiots flashing me??"

I broadly agree with this, but only when the inside lane is clear. What I cannot abide is the situation where you are overtaking a line of lorries at 70MPH in the middle lane and people still tailgate you or flash you, because in their eyes you should be going quicker.
Overall though I think that this is a good move, because few people seem to have good lane discipline in the UK. If they were made to spend a couple of weeks driving on French motorways, they would definitely learn how to get back in the inside lane after overtaking.

 

[andya700]

Except there is never a reason to hog the middle lane, while there might well be a valid excuse for the speeding. So your comparison is wrong.

Stop trying to justify yourself.

Whilst I am not an absolute angel when it comes to speed, I would love to hear a "valid excuse" for it.

 

[stormienam]

This sums the problem up - "I'm doing 70 therefore I can stay in the middle lane, why are all those idiots flashing me??"

Why flash me? you are speeding? I'm driving limit therefore I'm not going to speed because someone is flashing me. Flashing me is meant to intimidated me? Er no use the 'fast lane' sorry right hand lane and move on.

I use middle when there are steady flow of cars in left hand lane constantly going below the speed limit as I am not going to move over to the left for 250 yards drive a 70 them come up to a car travelling at 60-65 then come out again and keep repeating when the middle and right hand lanes are free.

I don't just drive down the right hand lane, however I will use the middle when there are a number of left hand joining roads and slow flowing traffic in left hand.

Bring on the tickets lol

 

[new2me]

How many times do you see the 2 outside lanes jam packed but he inner lane is free for many 100's of yards when its perfectly safe to pull into??

This is something that used to make me laugh, as it often meant there was a police, or even just a VOSA vehicle cruising about 65 in the left. You might be driving smoothly enough for miles on a moderately busy motorway, people speeding in the outside lanes and the folk on the inside happily doing 70. Then suddenly, the inside slows down and people start to move to the right, but not gain speed and a bottle neck develops as the outside slows down too ... until they've passed the police vehicle, or realised it was just the VOSA up ahead. Comical.

Going south on the M1 the other day though, 4 lanes equally busy doing around 60, suddenly became 2 almost standstill right hand lanes so people could check out an accident on the northbound. The left hand lanes actually thinned out as drivers pulled out to get a better view.

 

[new2me]

Why flash me? you are speeding? I'm driving limit therefore I'm not going to speed because someone is flashing me. Flashing me is meant to intimidated me? Er no use the 'fast lane' sorry right hand lane and move on.

"Er, no" It is NOT a 'fast lane' as has been pointed out several times in the thread.

 

[big dave hull]

At least when i fall asleep in the middle lane ive got chance to wake up before i hit anything!!

 

[Uneducated_Rick]

Followed a great example of MLH today - A1(M) where it is 3 lanes, about 2 miles before the 2 mile warning sign before the left lane filters off (yes, actually 4 miles before the junction) - someone sitting in the middle lane, doing 50, because he didn't want to be in the left filter - cars undertaking and overtaking him and he has the audacity to look disgusted at all the cars (not me, I was lucky enough to get into a gap over people overtaking) going up his inside

If I am doing 70-77mph why does anyone need to overtake me? They are speeding if they do. They should be able to sit behind me and not need to over or undertake. How are you hogging the lane then? You aren't stopping them get passed because they shouldn't be passing you

If you're sitting at anything over 70 then you're speeding too. In reality your speedo might say 70mph and you're doing 68, someone else's might say 70 and they're doing 72.

I set my cruise control to 70 and I regularly get people going past at, what I estimate to be, 3 or 4 mph faster than me - I suspect my speedo under-registers slightly but I'm not going to risk doing 73/74 incase mine is fine and everyone else just likes to nudge the rules slightly

Suppose I overtake a car. Ahead u see a slower moving lorry, probably 10 seconds away. Do you pull in then pull out again quickly, maybe getting trapped on the inside lane or carry on? What if the vehicle is 15 seconds away, or they suddenly speed up? I do not want to be changing lanes every 20 seconds!!

exactly - speeding is clear cut above or below - this relies on interpretation which is always going to cause complaints

Nothing like as dangerous as speeding.

Look up the formulas for kinetic energy and momentum and see what part speed plays in them.

It's not about the maths, it's about the frustration and attitude. Going significantly below the speed limit is what causes a lot of people to get wound up and then try and overtake where it isn't really safe.

How many times do you see the 2 outside lanes jam packed but he inner lane is free for many 100's of yards when its perfectly safe to pull into??

all the time on the M25 - when going round from A1(M) to M4 I rarely have to get out of the left hand lane, usually a few people in the 2nd lane, but lanes 3 and 4 are full of people sitting at 60-65 getting frustrated they're not moving quicker

 

[Ricardodaforce]

To those that insist on arguing the point. Let's see again what the Highway Code says:

You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past.

You really have no credible argument.

 

[cambsno]

To those that insist on arguing the point. Let's see again what the Highway Code says:

You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past.

You really have no credible argument.

But what does that mean? So as soon as I pass I should pull over, but 5 seconds later pull out again as I come up to a slower car? In theory you could get me weaving between lanes every 15 seconds or so? Maybe that's an extreme example but it does happen.

 

[new2me]

So as soon as I pass I should pull over, but 5 seconds later pull out again as I come up to a slower car? In theory you could get me weaving between lanes every 15 seconds or so? Maybe that's an extreme example but it does happen.

Do you consider that to be "safe" behaviour?
I was looking at the Beeb reader comments before Ricardo posted the link and it was full of idiotic extreme examples. It's worse than listening to football commentators over complicating the away goal rule

 

[Ricardodaforce]

But what does that mean? So as soon as I pass I should pull over, but 5 seconds later pull out again as I come up to a slower car? In theory you could get me weaving between lanes every 15 seconds or so? Maybe that's an extreme example but it does happen.

Here's an idea. If it's so hard to comprehend, and/or you don't agree with it, why don't you take it up with the government? Maybe you do have a point. Maybe they will take into account your opinion and rewrite the Highway Code.

 

[big soft moose]

Isnt the acid test ' when the road ahead is clear' - ie if you overtake you should pull back in if you can't see anything else ahead that you need to overtake also.

thus overtaking a line of lorries spaced 200m apart isnt hogging - overtaking one lorry then merrily carrying on in lane 2 for no reason is

likewise moving over for junctions isnt hogging so long as you move back once you've pased the junction

 

[SpikeK6]

But what does that mean? So as soon as I pass I should pull over, but 5 seconds later pull out again as I come up to a slower car? In theory you could get me weaving between lanes every 15 seconds or so? Maybe that's an extreme example but it does happen.

why not they do it in europe, and if they cannot get straight back out they slow a little then pull out when safe to do so.

Cars/vans have so much power these days it is possible to do it, not like years ago when it took an age to get up to speed then no more.

its going to be a case that you will be on camera if the police catch you doing it and if they think they deem you to be hogging the lane then they will pull you over ticket you for it and then its down to you to fight it or not, same as any other offence which is deemed as the discretion of the officer involved till proven otherwise.

I think it should be fines straight away none of this we will elt you off with a warning this time blah blah blah namby pamby attitude, start as you mean to go on and people will get the message quicker.

 

[fuzzyedges]

The lawyer in me says
At what distance from the car in front of you do you become a tailgater
How far do you have to travel in the center or outside lane to become a hogger
So much fun to be had in court me thinks
Maybe these laws were just thought up by the goverment to appease a defecting motorist
from not voting for them next time
Just like many motoring laws very hard to enforce and to be honest they hardly bother with some

 

[pepi1967]

The lawyer in me says
At what distance from the car in front of you do you become a tailgater
How far do you have to travel in the center or outside lane to become a hogger
So much fun to be had in court me thinks
Maybe these laws were just thought up by the goverment to appease a defecting motorist
from not voting for them next time
Just like many motoring laws very hard to enforce and to be honest they hardly bother with some

Simple. If you break the two second rule your too close.

 

[seriousrikk]

Why flash me? you are speeding? I'm driving limit therefore I'm not going to speed because someone is flashing me. Flashing me is meant to intimidated me? Er no use the 'fast lane' sorry right hand lane and move on.

If you are sitting in the middle lane while not overtaking, and a driver is driving quicker than you in the left hand lane, you are forcing them to cross two lanes to the outside lane in order to get past you. Do you really think that is OK?

I use middle when there are steady flow of cars in left hand lane constantly going below the speed limit as I am not going to move over to the left for 250 yards drive a 70 them come up to a car travelling at 60-65 then come out again and keep repeating when the middle and right hand lanes are free.

Well since your stopping distance at 70 is just over 100 yards, you would be a bit silly if you pulled into a 250 yard gap only to pull out again seconds later. This does not target people doing that. This targets people in the middle lane when the left lane is clear.

I don't just drive down the right hand lane, however I will use the middle when there are a number of left hand joining roads and slow flowing traffic in left hand.

Which, unless you are driving significant distance without pulling back into a clear left lane, is not a problem

 

[Dave *]

Whilst I am not an absolute angel when it comes to speed, I would love to hear a "valid excuse" for it.

The most obvious, unmarked police cars? At court a number of people have had excuses accepted as valid, for example doctors going to an emergency, people going to hospital or people in an emergency situation, trying to escape a dangerous situation, even a desperate need for the toilet has been accepted as a valid excuse for speeding by a court.

The point I was making was it is a Magistrate's job to decide on that valid excuse, not your everyday John, Jack or Joe doing 69mph in the third lane thinking "I'm not letting anyone passed, I'm doing my bit for road safety and stopping people speeding", when all they are doing is being the cause for more serious problems like road rage or undertaking and causing an accident.

 

[odd jim]

Whilst I am not an absolute angel when it comes to speed, I would love to hear a "valid excuse" for it.

Any valid emergency would be a 'valid excuse'.

Such as an on call Dr (and doctors DON'T have an exemption in law to speed, no matter what UNLESS they are a basics Dr working for the ambulance service especially trained) going to an emergency, a Coastguard vehicle, a secret service vehicle (SIS), I could go on. There are many individuals and agencies who in law do not have an exemption in speed, but would have a legal DEFENCE for doing so.

 

[odd jim]

The lawyer in me says
At what distance from the car in front of you do you become a tailgater
How far do you have to travel in the center or outside lane to become a hogger
So much fun to be had in court me thinks
Maybe these laws were just thought up by the goverment to appease a defecting motorist
from not voting for them next time
Just like many motoring laws very hard to enforce and to be honest they hardly bother with some

Again, common sense.

Seriously, can people not think for themselves anymore or does it always need to be spoon fed??

 

[neil_g]

Again, common sense.

Seriously, can people not think for themselves anymore or does it always need to be spoon fed??

like i said about 2 pages of nonsense back.. it aint rocket science..

 

[LASTOLITE]

You know that is the raise d'être for some people in a lot of posts?

But anything to stop the idiots trundling along in the middle or third lane is a good idea.

Strategically placed snipers on bridges it is then

 

[cambsno]

Again, common sense.

Seriously, can people not think for themselves anymore or does it always need to be spoon fed??

But we all have a different interpretation of common sense, and have different values. What may be common sense for me may not be for someone else or vice versa.

 

[cambsno]

Isnt the acid test ' when the road ahead is clear' - ie if you overtake you should pull back in if you can't see anything else ahead that you need to overtake also.

thus overtaking a line of lorries spaced 200m apart isnt hogging - overtaking one lorry then merrily carrying on in lane 2 for no reason is

likewise moving over for junctions isnt hogging so long as you move back once you've pased the junction

Thats my view, but its the legal definition thats important.

 

[Dave *]

But we all have a different interpretation of common sense, and have different values. What may be common sense for me may not be for someone else or vice versa.

That's why you roll the dice sometimes and hope the Mags have the same brand of common sense you do .

 

[ZoneV]

Thats my view, but its the legal definition thats important.

On a single carriageway, how would you differentiate overtaking a line of cars from driving on the wrong side of the road?

It's the same thing - the Police will make a judgement call which you can contest in court if you disagree.

 

[odd jim]

Thats my view, but its the legal definition thats important.

In that case, why dont you simply look at the definition of inconsiderate driving (sec 3 Road Traffic Act)??? It's there for all to see and has been for years. It's shouldn't be a shock to people now as its been law since the act came into play in 1988.

"3(4)A person is to be regarded as driving without reasonable consideration for other persons only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving."

Inconvenience someone (by not moving over when you should thereby holding them up) then you're guilty of the offence. Just as if you pull out, causing someone to brake, block a road with a stationary vehicle, fail to indicate to come off a roundabout causing traffic to give way unnecessarily etc etc.

 

[joescrivens]

"3(4)A person is to be regarded as driving without reasonable consideration for other persons only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving."

even that isn't clear cut is it.

If I overtake a huge lorry who is doing 60mph on the m1 in the middle lane and i pull out to the third lane to do it and someone comes up behind me doing 90mph and has to slow down as i am now in their way - I've just inconvenienced him as he's now having to apply his breaks and he can't get passed me until i have overtaken the lorry. He's flashing his lights at me all angry

:shrug:

so according to that law i'm the one in the wrong - even though he is speeding.

You see, it's not as clear cut as you seem to want to make it

 

[odd jim]

even that isn't clear cut is it.

If I overtake a huge lorry who is doing 60mph on the m1 in the middle lane and i pull out to the third lane to do it and someone comes up behind me doing 90mph and has to slow down as i am now in their way - I've just inconvenienced him as he's now having to apply his breaks and he can't get passed me until i have overtaken the lorry. He's flashing his lights at me all angry

:shrug:

so according to that law i'm the one in the wrong - even though he is speeding.

You see, it's not as clear cut as you seem to want to make it

The law can be interpreted but as long as its interpreted within those boundaries you can be found guilty of the offence. And there are the boundaries so now you know! People will just have to be on their best behaviour. If everyone drives properly they haven't got anything to worry about, that's the point!

And what you've described above is inconsiderate driving. You should have seen the car in your offside mirror and waited. It makes no odds what speed he's driving at.

 

[ZoneV]

even that isn't clear cut is it.

If I overtake a huge lorry who is doing 60mph on the m1 in the middle lane and i pull out to the third lane to do it and someone comes up behind me doing 90mph and has to slow down as i am now in their way - I've just inconvenienced him as he's now having to apply his breaks and he can't get passed me until i have overtaken the lorry. He's flashing his lights at me all angry

:shrug:

so according to that law i'm the one in the wrong - even though he is speeding.

That's what the shiny things stuck to the outside of the doors are for.

 

[srichards]

It's all down to observation skills really. If you were always taught to blend in with other traffic and not get in other people's way then you carry that over. That's what my instructor taught me to do. You do not do anything that will cause another to change direction or speed.

I think the old Goofy cartoon from the 1950s sums up driving behaviour :

http://youtu.be/0ZgiVicpZGk

 

[pepi1967]

Not sure why this debate has changed to a what if I did this debate. It's simple. You hog the middle lane and the police nick you either pay the fine or argue against it in court. Simples.

 

[Uneducated_Rick]

And what you've described above is inconsiderate driving. You should have seen the car in your offside mirror and waited. It makes no odds what speed he's driving at.

what about going past a long string of traffic that you legitimately don't need to pull in between one vehicle and the next (not that unusual) - will someone speeding to that degree they may not have been visible when you pulled out

again something I experience fairly often on the A1M

 

[joescrivens]

And what you've described above is inconsiderate driving. You should have seen the car in your offside mirror and waited. It makes no odds what speed he's driving at.

That's what the shiny things stuck to the outside of the doors are for.

Nope.

You look and the guy a safe distance away, so you pull out which you are more than entitled to do. Then before you know it he's already on you because he was got annoyed you were about to pull out and sped up to 90mph.

you can try and make it as clear cut as you like but it really sin't

 

[fuzzyedges]

Again, common sense.

Seriously, can people not think for themselves anymore or does it always need to be spoon fed??

In a court of law you cant just say he was speeding Thats why they have calibrated speed guns and if it wasnt calibrated that day you wernt speeding

So what is the distance and how do you measure it for tailgating

Courts do not use common sense as a yard stick only proof

Again I say its an appeasement law
There will be extreme tailgaters that will be caught as there will be extreme hoggers but its when him in blue has an off day and starts booking willy nilly when the fun will start