Surprised to be undertaken

[TripleS]

I deem undertaking to be something where you deliberately change lanes in order to pass a car in front on the left, however, if you're already established in the left lane, and there's a car in the right lane needlessly, then travelling at the speed limit and passing them is just that, passing.

That's how I view it.

Well yes, I feel much the same; although having said that, I have occasionally seen the suggestion that the rules should be changed so that 'undertaking' becomes fully acceptable, but I've never felt comfortable with that idea. I would, however, like the driving shown in clip 1 to be regarded as acceptable: it didn't look careless to me.

[vonhosen]

I deem undertaking to be something where you deliberately change lanes in order to pass a car in front on the left, however, if you're already established in the left lane, and there's a car in the right lane needlessly, then travelling at the speed limit and passing them is just that, passing.

That's how I view it.

That's fine, if the Police/CPS/Courts agree with your view.
Of course if they don't then your view potentially places you in conflict with the law.
I personally don't interpret the HC the same way you do.

[akirk]

Well yes, I feel much the same; although having said that, I have occasionally seen the suggestion that the rules should be changed so that 'undertaking' becomes fully acceptable, but I've never felt comfortable with that idea. I would, however, like the driving shown in clip 1 to be regarded as acceptable: it didn't look careless to me.

I suspect that the problem with clip one was not the technical / actual driving by the video car - but that he is doing so in the context of our current law... as 99% of drivers would not be expecting to be undertaken, it would only require one of the cars being undertaken to move left in the confidence that the lane is empty to have a rather nasty accident - yes they should look first, but many drivers would miss that car and I suspect the camera car would rightly be seen to have caused the accident...

no excuse for that driving other than an arrogant statement about the middle lane drivers - yes, they are driving badly, but that is not the excuse for further bad driving...

Alasdair

[TheInsanity1234]

I deem undertaking to be something where you deliberately change lanes in order to pass a car in front on the left, however, if you're already established in the left lane, and there's a car in the right lane needlessly, then travelling at the speed limit and passing them is just that, passing.

That's how I view it.

Well yes, I feel much the same; although having said that, I have occasionally seen the suggestion that the rules should be changed so that 'undertaking' becomes fully acceptable, but I've never felt comfortable with that idea. I would, however, like the driving shown in clip 1 to be regarded as acceptable: it didn't look careless to me.

Quite, that kind of driving isn't too bad if the car was already established in lane 1 when it encountered the long line of L2 drivers.
If the driver made a deliberate decision to move over to L1 from L1 because the driver ended up behind those cars, then that's not good.

[Gareth]

Not everybody is more critical of passing on the left than those who don't keep left when not overtaking though. See my first sentence, some will be, some won't. It depends how it fits with their own values/beliefs.

Yeah that's all very well but the implied threat, (not yours directly but reiterated by your comments), is that a driver is more likely to be reported for staying in lane 1 and passing slower traffic than the slower traffic so passed.

Can anybody answer my earlier questions (or point me in the direction I'm likely to be able to find answers): What do the decided cases show? How bad must the driving be to result in a prosecution for passing to the left of other vehicles on a multi-lane road? Is this enough on its own? Or have there always been extenuating circumstances that made it necessary to prosecute, and in which passing on the left was then held as an (additional?) example of careless driving?

[akirk]

Not everybody is more critical of passing on the left than those who don't keep left when not overtaking though. See my first sentence, some will be, some won't. It depends how it fits with their own values/beliefs.

Yeah that's all very well but the implied threat, (not yours directly but reiterated by your comments), is that a driver is more likely to be reported for staying in lane 1 and passing slower traffic than the slower traffic so passed.

that would seem to be logical though - undertaking as per that video in lane 1 is higher risk / more likely to create an accident than sitting incorrectly in lane 2 - both wrong / bad driving, but one more critical to deal with?

Alasdair

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Where is the wording of the law you speak of, other than in your heart of hearts?

You're right, of course, in a literal sense. I've amended my post accordingly.

The trouble, in my own humble opinion, is that people have lost respect for the Highway Code and now want black and white law to tell them what to do. Until they're told they'll be prosecuted for something, and shown the text that tells them what they must not do, and the scale of punishments associated with it, they'll continue to bend the truth, including to themselves, and continue to do foolish, unsafe and antisocial things "because it's not illegal".

/rant over

[Matt62]

Hmmmm....I'm not sure though that many of the 'undertakers' would see it like this. In situations like the first video, the drivers in lane 2 are very clearly ignoring the HC and basic protocol. The 'Barrack Room Lawyer' here and (I suspect) the safest driver in most situations has slightly stretched the HC wording in his mind, and taking into account a hard shoulder escape route has continued in lane. I imagine that even amongst the qualified 'Advanced Drivers' here, there are some who would also do this - but probably not with a Police Car following.

[OldenBill]

I haven't visited this excellent forum for some time and when I do, I find myself having to update my driving technique. Motoring procedures and traffic flow have altered so much over the many years since I took my test that I find the information gained essential for survival.

However, from reading this thread and similar others, am I picking up from some of the more "philosophical" and tolerant views expressed that overtaking on the nearside is now deemed acceptable on the open road where vehicles are NOT queuing in multiple lanes?

I read one comment to the effect that overtaking in this way is "not illegal .... never has been". Perhaps not illegal but in breach of the Highway Code and surely still likely to inform a prosecution case for due care. If this is the new situation, educational road signs imploring drivers to return to the nearside would appear to be irrelevant.

The opinions expressed on this thread have been most useful. The variety of takes on " undertaking" does not "surprise" me.

What I think the main point arising is the fact that The Highway Code needs regular revision, not just every five years or so. It certainly needs to clarify this issue, along with merge in turn and a number of other areas of confusion, as it finally did over "bus priority" some years ago.

Sadly not many drivers have read the document since their driving test perhaps because it is so expensive!

[TripleS]

....The Highway Code needs regular revision, not just every five years or so. It certainly needs to clarify this issue, along with merge in turn and a number of other areas of confusion, as it finally did over "bus priority" some years ago.

Sadly not many drivers have read the document since their driving test perhaps because it is so expensive!

More prominent in my mind is the thought that the HC is far too elaborate and detailed, and it ought to be greatly simplified and slimmed down. TBH I think that is the main reason it gets so little attention from road users after they pass their driving test. Plenty of other things in their lives have a greater call on their time and attention.

I suspect that to a large extent road users feel that they can get around quite adequately without needing to 'bother with all that stuff' - and to a considerable extent I think they are right. No doubt some mishaps could be avoided if they were to be aware of all the rules, and understand them, and retain the information, and apply it consistently; but overall I doubt if it would make a huge difference to road safety.

For the most part people work reasonably well with what's going on around them, and on the whole I don't think they're doing badly.

This is, of course, a personal view that will not be shared by all, as I am, no doubt, about to have robustly confirmed.

[akirk]

The opinions expressed on this thread have been most useful. The variety of takes on " undertaking" does not "surprise" me.

What I think the main point arising is the fact that The Highway Code needs regular revision, not just every five years or so. It certainly needs to clarify this issue, along with merge in turn and a number of other areas of confusion, as it finally did over "bus priority" some years ago.

Sadly not many drivers have read the document since their driving test perhaps because it is so expensive!

The highway code is available online free of charge
https://www.gov.uk/browse/driving/highway-code

the highway code is (in my view) very clear on this question, e.g. for motorways:
https://www.gov.uk/motorways-253-to-273 ... 267-to-269

Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

criteria:
- congested
- adjacent lanes moving at similar speeds
- traffic in left-hand lanes sometimes moving faster than traffic to the right
- keep up with traffic

none of those applied to video link 1 above - so there is complete clarity in the highway code, that driver was in breach of this section of the highway code

as far as I can see (without detailed studying) there doesn't seem to be the same reference for non-motorways, perhaps implying that it is legal on a multi-lane dual carriageway! logically a multi-lane dual carriageway could have cars turning right, where a motorway will not - so more complex, but I suspect that the detail above for motorways should act as a simple base point for deciding how to drive on multi-lane dual carriageways

merge in turn is also in the highway code:
https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-dr ... 133-to-143

Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.

I think that the highway code is possibly updated more frequently than most car drivers realise
you can use twitter: https://twitter.com/highwaycodegb and facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighwayCodeGB to get reminders / updates... but ultimately our legal system expects the individual to be aware of changes and take responsibility for that knowledge...

Alasdair

[trashbat]

Hmmmm....I'm not sure though that many of the 'undertakers' would see it like this. In situations like the first video, the drivers in lane 2 are very clearly ignoring the HC and basic protocol. The 'Barrack Room Lawyer' here and (I suspect) the safest driver in most situations has slightly stretched the HC wording in his mind, and taking into account a hard shoulder escape route has continued in lane. I imagine that even amongst the qualified 'Advanced Drivers' here, there are some who would also do this - but probably not with a Police Car following.

In a general English legal context, not just motoring, how do you think you would get on using other people's ignorant misdeeds as a defence to your own wilful ones?

[Ancient]

If a vehicle in lane 1 intentionally increases speed to be faster than traffic in lane 2, or moves from lane 2 into lane 1 to maintain a faster speed, this is an undertake and is illegal.

I suppose I had better hand myself in then!

A situation last year, on M25 clockwise, S of London:
In the outer lane, a foreign registered truck driving at a steady 50mph. I was next lane in and overtaking traffic on my nearside when I saw him ahead, complete with every car that was overtaking me swerving left to go past him. As I approached I slowed, watching cars behind me and moved a lane to my left (I now had one 'clear' lane between him and me for those overtakers to use when they finally saw him). Matching his speed I remained there letting vehicles pass on both sides until there was a gap to move safely to lane 1. I then used my hands-free facility to call 112 and report his driving, position and registration.

I could then have chosen to remain behind him, but we were effectively forming a (permeable) 'rolling roadblock' and I was in exactly the position to be affected had any outer-lane user lost control on realising what was ahead of them. I therefore proceeded to undertake - having changed lanes to position myself in the safest place to do so (two lanes between me and the slow vehicle in this case). Competent and careful? I like to think so but it fails your test.

[OldenBill]

[quote="akirk"][quote="OldenBill"]The opinions expressed on this thread have been most useful. The variety of takes on " undertaking" does not "surprise" me.

What I think the main point arising is the fact that The Highway Code needs regular revision, not just every five years or so. It certainly needs to clarify this issue, along with merge in turn and a number of other areas of confusion, as it finally did over "bus priority" some years ago.

Sadly not many drivers have read the document since their driving test perhaps because it is so expensive![/quote]

The highway code is available online free of charge
https://www.gov.uk/browse/driving/highway-code

the highway code is (in my view) very clear on this question, e.g. for motorways:
https://www.gov.uk/motorways-253-to-273 ... 267-to-269

[quote]Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.[/quote]

criteria:
- congested
- adjacent lanes moving at similar speeds
- traffic in left-hand lanes sometimes moving faster than traffic to the right
- keep up with traffic

none of those applied to video link 1 above - so there is complete clarity in the highway code, that driver was in breach of this section of the highway code

as far as I can see (without detailed studying) there doesn't seem to be the same reference for non-motorways, perhaps implying that it is legal on a multi-lane dual carriageway! logically a multi-lane dual carriageway could have cars turning right, where a motorway will not - so more complex, but I suspect that the detail above for motorways should act as a simple base point for deciding how to drive on multi-lane dual carriageways

merge in turn is also in the highway code:
https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-dr ... 133-to-143
[quote]Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.[/quote]

I think that the highway code is possibly updated more frequently than most car drivers realise
you can use twitter: https://twitter.com/highwaycodegb and facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighwayCodeGB to get reminders / updates... but ultimately our legal system expects the individual to be aware of changes and take responsibility for that knowledge...

Alasdair[/quote]

I am most obliged to you, Alisdair, for your link to the gov.uk website which obviously hides under a bushell. Last time I searched on line I recall only seeing the Northern Ireland version. Most people I imagine still expect to buy the Code from a bookshop at some cost and those offered always seem to be somewhat out of date.

You correctly quote the paragraph on "merge in turn" but I would submit that it should either be removed entirely or be made the subject of national advertising because, as it stands, most drivers are unaware of the advice and perform dangerous blocking manoeuvres to show their resentment at what they perceive to be "cutting in".

[akirk]

I am most obliged to you, Alisdair, for your link to the gov.uk website which obviously hides under a bushell. Last time I searched on line I recall only seeing the Northern Ireland version. Most people I imagine still expect to buy the Code from a bookshop at some cost and those offered always seem to be somewhat out of date.

You correctly quote the paragraph on "merge in turn" but I would submit that it should either be removed entirely or be made the subject of national advertising because, as it stands, most drivers are unaware of the advice and perform dangerous blocking manoeuvres to show their resentment at what they perceive to be "cutting in".

not a problem - the gov.uk website is actually very good - though not always easy to find what you want...

ref. merging - I think that the issue is often speed...
I don't think that people mind doing it at slow speeds - much as we have a national queuing mentality, so we are often courteous and let people in - but it is clear that it is speed related in the HC - so it is not expected on a dual carriageway coming down to one lane - though ironically people are often better at it in those circumstances!

Alasdair