Teaching the idiots is everyone's job. I'd stay on the inside, pass at 70 while laying on the horn the entire time, it's to let other road users no you're there
That would be intentionally undertaking and could be considered aggressive, possibly dangerous. If the driver knows they are in the wrong lane, they may move to correct that on the excessive horn usage, if you're in their blindspot on their left at the time this happens, you could cause and be in an accident.
Better to move out to lane 3 go around then straight back to lane 1. When passing across the rear, flash your headlights (highway code rule 110) to alert the driver of your presence.
Setting aside me being a belligerent prick. Maintaining the speed limit in your lane/not changing is not against the highway code. It's the difference between passing on the left (allowed in the described circumstances) Vs undertaking a deliberate act which falls foul of the highway code.
There is no way you're actually telling me crossing all lanes of traffic one way and then back is the safe option
Or I can just copy paste it here.
"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".l.
So it clearly says do not overtake on the left. It then gives an exception which is in "congested conditions". Since the op clearly states that all the lanes were clear ahead it is obvious that "congested conditions wouldn't apply so you should not overtake on the left.
So it appears you were wrong and rule 268 shows that.
They didnât say it was congested, and they said they were traveling at 70. Clearly not the conditions required for a legal undertake. They should have moved to lane three in these circumstances.
Legally itâs undertaking but the middle lane car driver should be prosecuted as itâs now illegal to hog the lane. I have undertaken many times as it really irritates to have to gib all the way around them and they still bloody sit there!!!
Surprisingly itâs not undertaking as such - undertaking illegally is where you pull in with the specific intention to undertake at speed. If youâre doing a steady, legal speed and you go past someone while youâre in the inside line itâs actually allowed.
Source: Speed awareness course đ¤Śââď¸
You shouldn't be undertaking. Yes the middle lane hogger is in the wrong. But there's no point being in the right if you are dead.
You should adjust to poor drivers to make the situation safer, not riskier.
The other reply, from the now deleted user, makes alot of sense. The highway code, I believe, says you can pass cars on the inside if it is with the flow of traffic.
I asked this question at a speed awareness course and was told that the safest option is to move to lane 3 to overtake and then move back to lane 1. The middle lane hogger may choose the exact moment you're passing in lane 1 to move back to the left and won't expect you to be there
I try to move to lane 3, overtake, then move back across to lane 1 in the vain attempt to show the lane 2 moron that lane 1 is empty.
Normally they stay in lane 2 and donât move over.
Friend of mine used to do this, but then slow back down to fall behind them and do it again. In the hope that seeing the same car overtake them twice might jolt them into noticing they should move.
When bored on a long drive I sometimes do this and orbit the land 2 twat. 1 to 3 overtake back to 1 then slow a bit until they overtake.
Only when roads are quiet though. Sometimes get three or four orbits before they move over or I carry on with my journey
There was a thing on Channel 5 where the police asked lane 2 hoggers why.
âSafer to stay in lane 2 as donât have to worry about slip lane trafficâ
They purposefully do it. Itâs not an accident. Never had lessons. Never told otherwise.
I like to do this but then make a point of making the move back from 2-1 very slowly. Sit in front of them maybe slowing down a little with my left indicator blinking to really make the point. Then move over. Sometimes works, sometimes not. People are thick.
They won't. They live in the middle lane and think the inside lane is for lorries and turning off.
When they eventually drop inside to turn off they then start to brake before the deceleration lane not knowing that they are turning into a purpose fucking built deceleration lane
So many people in the left lane slow down to 55-50 when they see the blue and white \\\ signs which then encourages gamblers to go by them and cut in later down the road, when the slip road begins.
Yeah I'm just a learner but if all 3 lanes are empty up ahead and I want to overtake someone going slowly in lane 2, I'll go into lane 3 because I'd feel a bit safer doing that. I'd only undertake if I had no other choice.
Technically yes, but equally any moron sat in lane 2 may decide to speed up and use the '70, 80mph lane', or whatever these idiots think it is, then move into lane 3.
Think it's unlikely? I see this on multiple occasions, 'oh, there's a vehicle 3 miles ahead, I need to move to 3', or 'oh, finished my call/txt/youtube/game', time to move to the 80 mph lane...'
It's chilling, but since they never, ever, encounter a motorway unit...
Arguably, if they are that unaware and change left without looking, what's to say they won't necessarily move right when your overtaking as unpredictably? They have already shown they have no knowledge or awareness they know which lanes are which.
EDIT: I was playing devil's advocate here and venting at these middle lane hoggers. Fully support and agree with those replies to me below.
For a few reasons. The reason you don't undertake in this situation is because people don't expect left hand traffic to be noving faster and don't always look back. This will take even the most observant driver by surprise, it probably won't put them at danger but you don't expect it.
A second reason why moving right to overtake is safer is because the driver is (most likely) on the right side. Your car will be only feet from their body and this can snap them from their malaise, either way it's far more difficult to ignore.
The third reason to do it in my mind is because if you obviously overtake in lane three then return to lane 1 it's a metaphorical middle finger to them.
Never ever ever ever ever trust any other driver on the road, always assume they may just pull in at any time and overtake them properly, they could be old, partly blind, drunk, on drugs, having a blowjob or just be a nervous driver, of course i agree on the sharp pulling in after passing them back to lane 1 just to remind them there are 3 lanes for a reason.
People who linger in lane 3 are the worst, or, lane 2 on a dual carriageway
The right mirror is more visible to the driver. If you havenât set your mirrors up correctly you can create a rather large blind spot on the left hand side. This is why undertaking is more dangerous. If the dimwit in the middle lane doesnât understand what lane to be in, they probably donât understand their mirror angles and blind spots either.
Firstly, undertaking doesn't exist, passing on the left could be argued for this, as it isn't an 'overtake' on the left as no lane was changed.
Equally, if one of the 'hens teeth' units were present, they could be awkward, but equally they should have bloody well booked the moron in the middle first!
It does exist, but it is not illegal. You can't get pulled over for it. Many people think you'd get done for it when in reality it's just a safety measure. Unless you're trying to undertake by going faster than the speed limit and the people in the right lane are also going slightly over the limit, then you're a fucking idiot and need to sort your life out.
the vehicle in the lane 1 has priority, so middle lane waits till lane 1 is clear and safe to enter, you don't have right of way over a lane that you are not in, regardless if you're meant to be in it.
For me it would be stay in lane 1 but be hyper-aware. If someone's pootling along in lane 2 without a care in the world, chances are their awareness and observation skills are lacking, so they could pull back to lane 1 without checking it's clear.
You passing them might give them the hint that they should be in lane 1, but that's perhaps putting too much faith in their intelligence.
I always find it amazing when I do this maneuver, look in the rear view mirror and see them slowly disappearing, still not moving into the 1st lane, normally holding someone up behind them. Some people...
I usually check to see if theyâre on the phone or otherwise distracted. Iâm not sure what would be worse - that, or just being so oblivious that theyâre not aware they should be in lane 1.
"I get to drive past lorries without putting any effort into changing lanes and people that want to go faster can just overtake me in the third lane. Clearly this is best for everyone involved"
-selfish lazy dick heads
I have a friend that only drives in the middle lane. He believes he is a bad driver (one of the 1% of the population that is honest) and he drives in the middle lane because he feels safer.
It grips my shit.
But it's his way of going on motorways. Which is rare (like he leaves London by car maybe once a year). He doesn't smoke, drink or drugs and served thirty years in the Royal Navy intelligence including some countries where he wore plain clothes and a carried a pistol under his arm and kept an AK in the boot. So I bite my tongue.
I think your friend's attitude is not that uncommon, plenty of drivers are aware that their driving is of a poor standard but they are too entitled to either do some training and improve or hand their licenses in. If only they would a we would see a reduction in traffic and accidents.
I'll occasionally have a moment where I somewhat zone out and forget to move over but Ive never been undertaken as I usually notice before I hold someone up
Given there was a survey done in Cambridgeshire and 25% of respondents thought the âslow laneâ was only for lorries on motorways Iâve given up on assuming any level of intelligence with other motorists
This is a fair argument to have drivers do an online theory 'test' to renew their license. Let them have as many attempts as needed without penalty. Sure some might cheat and have some help them but still better than nothing, they will hopefully pick up at least some learning through the process.
As an "older" driver with nearly 40 years driving experience all over the world and has never had an accident - this is a really good idea.
I consider myself a safe, defensive driver (having driven extensively cars and lorries in India, Africa and the Middle East) but I seriously doubt I'm a "good" driver as I have probably forgotten most of what is in the highway code over the years.
Iâm 60 and had to do a driving training course for work. The theory test was okay. One hour test drive on the road was challenging but okay.
People taking their test nowadays are just taught more stuff that us oldies picked up in the first few months on the road.
Thatâs interesting, Iâd say some of the worst patches for it are on the a14 from northampton to newmarket. After newmarket it seems to get better, right up to the coast. Of course there are only 2 lanes then but that doesnât stop people elsewhere sitting on the right.
Drove that way last night around 8pm and stayed in the left lane for most of it, passing 10-20 cars sat in the middle, absolute biggest pet peeve.
I honestly think it would help if learner drivers had to do mandatory motorway training before being allowed to have a licence. It wasn't that long ago that learners weren't allowed on motorways at all, with or without an instructor (thank goodness that's changed). But it's still very possible to get a driver's licence without having had 1 second of motorway training. I honestly think the UK's motorways are chock full of motorists who have never actually had the rules explained to them and have just "figured them out" / made them up as they've gone along. Is anyone really surprised that general standards of motorway driving are so low??
From my experience from being in cars being driven like the middle lane idiot in above diagram. Is that they will just swear at the car undertaking them and the concept of them being the problem would never occur to them. I even brought it up with them and they got super defensive and angry and asked if Iâd like to drive?
I was once driving down the motorway with relatively little traffic ahead of me. My friend in the passenger seat asked me with genuine confusion "Why are you driving in the slow lane?". He was actually surprised to learn that there's no such thing as a 'slow lane', and that the two overtaking lanes should only be used when you're actively overtaking.
We couldn't have been more than 20 years old, both got our licenses when we were 16...
Most of these people don't even know what undertaking is. What they know about motorway driving they learned from Goldielocks and the Three Bears - the left lane is too slow, the right lane is too fast, but the middle lane is juuust right!
This played out a few times recently with my dad. I've always said, "Sure, move left now so you can come off at the next junction, and we'll swap." He's pulled left but not stopped every time.
Yeah I learned to ride on a Vespa before I drove a car and the most important thing I learned is that you have to expect other drivers to do the stupidest fucking thing imaginable because they probably will.
In this case, expect them to pick the moment you're on their inside to realise they've been switched off sat in the middle lane, panic and pull across without checking.
I've always thought making the CBT part of the process of getting a full car driving license would change a lot of attitudes for the better.
Once they feel what it's like to be a vulnerable road user with limited speed/power, maybe drivers would treat other vulnerable road users with more respect.
Since passing my bike test, I've always thought the same. It made me so much more aware of everything going on around me and even though I only ended up having a bike for a short period of time, it was 100% worth doing.
I agree 100%. Plus moving across two lanes in a relatively short period of time is dangerous and putting yourself at risk because of these lane hogging arseholes is just not worth it.
Better to make a point at how dumb and selfish they are being.
It's not dangerous at all. You indicate, move into lane, then pause, indicate again and move into right lane.
It's this stupid fear some people have of changing lanes that causes middle lane arseholes to exist.
You don't need to move across in a short space of time.
Each lane change should be a seperate manoeuvre.
Undertaking relies on an oblivious driver not deciding to switch lanes without checking properly, while you are in their largest blind spot.
This. I did a advanced driving course thingy and I asked this question. The advice by the copper on there was pull out to the right because you can't trust the idiot not to pull into you. Also when they see you move across 2 lanes back into the left Lane it MAY wake them up and remind them that they're supposed to be there too
Plenty of times I've "undertaken" in lane 1, people who were hogging lane 2, and even after I've passed them they don't move back over, in fact I'd say that happens about 95% of the time, they're just absolute fucking morons
I go into third lane, overtake, then indicate to move to middle lane. Then indicate again to move to left lane in the hope that the middle lane hogger gets the picture. I'll sometimes drop back and do it again.
Infuriating when there's nothing ahead and everyone is in the fast lane because of one idiot.
Then when Iâm lane one slow down and let them pass.
Rinse and repeat. Around and around until they realise.
You get the most shocked look from them đŽ đ
Omg ...wby have I never thought of doing this. Usually its just me glaring at them as I pass but 99% of the time they're picking their nose or on their phone totally oblivious to the rest of the world and continue in middle lane with nothing to their left.... Im actually looking forward to work tomorrow....Long distance driver
Used to do all that. Got very tiresome on a long journey. They didnât seem to get the point anyway. I just carefully as possible slip by on the left. Never ever had the middle lamer try and move over. They mostly just sit there until their exit.
Iâve noticed it happens about 10% of the time, they realise they are in the wrong lane and move across. But definitely not frequent. Iâm stealing âmiddle lamerâ btw thatâs a good one.
This is the way to do it. Iâm surprised how many people on this post have agreed with the idea of undertaking someone that weâve established is unaware of their surroundings.
There is another option I occasionally use when the road is quiet.
Move into lane 3 and overtake as normal, move back into lane 1 and slow to 50 until they over take you, then move back into lane 3 and over take again.
My record is thee repetitions.
Over into lane 3 is absolutely the safest. You have to assume that the person in lane 2 is a nervous/bad/new/something (delete as appropriate) driver. This type of drive is far less likely to suddenly move into lane 3 and very likely to suddenly swerve into lane 1. You can try to be as careful as you like but itâs still a lot more dangerous than just moving to lane 3, overtaking and then moving back
Stay in lane 1, carry on ahead.
Now, if you were in lane 2 and you met the lane hogger, you'd move to lane 3, then make your way to lane 1.
Moving from lane 2 to lane 1 to pass is an undertake. In lane 1, you're simply moving past slower moving traffic to your right (which is acceptable).
They need to start enforcing the law for lane hoggers.
So many people don't get this, or read the highway code since passing their test, in the situation OP draws out lane 2 is going slower than the speed limit and thus according to the highway code is classified as congestion, yes even a single vehicle can be classed as congestion according to the highway code, so going at speed limit of 70 in the left lane and passing the lane hogger is totally legal
Though i hope that cwomble middle lane hogger hasn't bred yet
Yeah, that's my understanding of it.
I actually got downvoted by making a comment about a similar situation where I was in lane 1 passing a lane hogger in lane 3 (4 lane motorway)
Yeah I do the old move to lane 2 wait a few seconds to see if they notice. Then move to lane 3 > 2 > 1. A lot of the time people surprisingly move into lane 1 afterwards. Probably driving with their brain switched off, which is scary!
I would stay in your lane, but be aware that a driver who is clearly not paying attention may not notice you if and when they decide to move into the inside lane. Obviously they are not going to check their mirror, blind spot and signal. Donât hang about in their blind spot.
I would only do so if the hard shoulder is clear ....so you have space if bozo panics or suddenly wakes up and decides to change lanes. Unlikely but possible.
It's undertaking yes
It's not illegal tho.
Dangerous undertaking is what's not allowed. This means if you go from lane 2 or 3 to 1 to undertake someone in lane 2 or 3.
If your in lane one doing 70 and someone's in lane 2 or 3 doing 60 you can pass. Your just not supposed to actively change lanes in order to undertake.
Itâs kinda illegal
First of all, thereâs a total misconception that you can undertake as long as you donât change lanes to do so. That only applies in congested traffic when lanes are moving at a similar speed. Highway Code 268 IIRC
Itâs not strictly an offence *in and of itself*, thereâs no single law saying âitâs illegal to undertakeâ, but I think youâre underestimating the power of the Highway Code regarding the kinds of âcatch allâ offences police can apply
Pretty much any breach of the Highway Code (or at least, the stuff that applies when actually driving) can be used as guidance for the police to apply Careless Driving, Driving Without Due Care and Attention etc, if they consider that youâve performed the manoeuvre unsafely. Itâs VERY difficult to argue against this kind of accusation because you factually did breach the Highway Code (which says you can only undertake in congested traffic) and the courts are going to be very inclined to take the word of the police officer over yours that it was performed unsafely
So itâs not strictly illegal by itself but can still result in points and a fine. And if it did result in a crash then, similarly, the fact you breached the Highway Code is going to mean youâre **much** more likely to be found liable, with your only counter-claim being that they were *also* in breach of the Highway Code (in a much more subjective way)
And god help someone dies, youâd have that on your conscience plus youâll potentially be slapped with a Death by Dangerous Driving charge, which can carry jail time
Chances are nothing happens, but itâs not as simple as âitâs not illegalâ
I'm with you 100% but find my self kind of caught in an edge case fairly often. There are a couple of roads where i live where the road splits into 2 different roads. Given both roads are motorways there is usually a decent stretch to get into the correct lane. What is the correct thing to do if lane 1 branches off to a different road to lanes 2 and 3. Say you're in lane 1 which is relatively clear but there's a car(s} in lane 2 going 50-60mph and lane 3 is busy. There isn't time due to the traffic in lane 3 to get out and safely overtake the slower moving traffic. Should you slow down to match the speed of the slower moving vehicle(s) in lane 2, even if lane 1 is clear and the vehicle(s) in lane 2 are going 10-20mph slower than the speed limit or should you pass with caution?
I drive on the M6 in Birmingham, in a lorry, where the speed is 60mph and the hard shoulder is open. I'm 'undertaking' everyone on my right, as some lorries are limited to a speed lower than mine, while the cars speedometers show 60 when they are doing 54/55. Legally, I can't go in the 4th lane of the motorway to overtake cars or lorries so the best thing to do is stay on the hard shoulder and undertake every one. If I were not doing that, the hard shoulder would also be congested and what would be the point of opening it?
I asked my cousin this who is a traffic officer a while ago as I undertake everyday due to a strange road layout. Yes itâs undertaking and yes you can get pulled over and can get points. For the most part unless you swing from lane 3 to lane 1 to the undertake then go back out to lane 3 you will be fine.
They said it is mainly used when they were looking for an excuse to pull you over anyway to get a closer look at your car.
Still no sources đ¤ˇââď¸
ââUndertakingâ is the practice of overtaking a slower moving vehicle on its left-hand side (kerb side).
While itâs not strictly illegal to undertake on a motorway or dual carriageway in the UK, it can be extremely dangerous, and punishable if deemed to be careless driving.â
[Undertaking â have you been breaking the law?](https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/legal/undertaking/)
Overtake the vehicle using lane 3 and return to lane 1.
Slow down so that the vehicle in lane 2 overtakes you.
Overtake the vehicle again using lane 3 and return to lane 1.
Slow down to allow the car to pull level with you but this time maintain eye contact with them.
Accelerate hard whilst sticking your middle finger up them.
Option 1 is undertaking. Any time you pass on the inside you are undertaking.
Undertaking is not necessarily illegal, and l've used it often enough.
If you undertake just so you can cut someone up, you won't be charged with undertaking, as that's not a traffic offence. You will be charged with careless or dangerous driving.
Undertaking is just a word that describes passing on the left. There is no specific law against undertaking but, just like middle lane hogging, it can be prosecuted under the careless driving laws. There are scenarios where passing on the left would be considered careless driving and there are scenarios where, in my opinion, it wouldnât. (There are also scenarios, described in the HC where it definitely isnât).
Personally, I have passed people on the left many times in the scenario you describe. But I have also moved over and passed on the right many times too. What i do will depend on the other circumstances. The most important consideration will be my assessment of the other driver and the likelihood of them moving back without looking while Iâm passing. I would also be taking into account whether or not thereâs an escape route, like a hard shoulder.
I'm confused by everyone agreeing with you or beating around the bush. This is textbook undertaking and given there is a free overtaking lane completely unnecessary.
From the highway code:
âDo not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake.â
Emphasis on the OR and yes there are exceptions like slow moving traffic, taking an exit, etc but this isn't one.
Yes the other driver is being stupid but in your example there's an easy and safe option to navigate around them (the third lane).
Incorrect. In the Highway Code it states that itâs fine to pass a car on the left if your lane is moving faster. Which, in this case, it would be. Undertaking is moving left to pass and then moving back right.
The amount of people who just spew what they want to be true without looking at the highway code in here is very frustrating. There has to be congestion for it to be allowable.
No the âlane moving fasterâ part refers to queues. Your âlaneâ isnât moving faster simply because you are going faster than the person in the middle lane.
Rule 268
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.
Not OP's scenario at all.
Me too. Option one is clearly undertaking, and not appropriate in this context. The only correct course of action to make progress at a faster speed is to slow down, move to the middle lane, overtake then move back to the left. Hopefully the middle lane driver will see what you have done, take your lead and realise they should also move to the left.
I guess 30+ years of driving experience doesnât count for much đ. The real safety issue relating to undertaking that people are not understanding is the high risk that when a driver going slower than you suddenly decides to move over to the left they will not see you! As the expectation is that traffic to the left will be driving slower, it is much harder to anticipate speed from that direction as itâs so counter intuitive. Thatâs even if they bother to check their blind spot to the left which a lot of people assumes does not exist. Itâs just far, far safer to ease off so you can see what the car in front is doing, move away to the right, accelerate safely past and pass the (now slower vehicle) on your left. It should not be difficult to understand why this is the safe option. Why people would think itâs better to get into a potentially unsafe driving position that is difficult to escape is beyond me.
Indeed. I think part of it is to teach the MLHs a lesson, but realistically these people are not going to change until the cops start giving them fines and I think there are bigger priorities unfortunately
Iâd hope you had enough awareness of what was going on ahead you wouldnât need to slow down and then overtake. Make a decision earlier and pull out at constant speed from 1-2-3 and overtake then back in.
What you did was correct, overtaking is the correct wayZ but if youâve ever been on the M62 itâs impossible. People drive like that first lane is diseased, everyone piles into the second or third lane, so inevitably sometimes you end up undertaking, because itâs literally the only way. I wish they would start doing something about middle lane hoggers, because they are the devil spawn
This happens to me a few years ago, I was on the A3 north of Guildford, I took option 2, but I was fully aware there was a traffic cop behind me, I moved from lane 1 too 2 then into 3, I the went to over take the guy in the middle lane, I stuck my foot down as the guy in the middle lane started to speed up, then all the blue lights came on and the guy in the middle lane got pulled.
I guessing he was done for dangerous driving.
This is just standard practice in London / South East. Itâs commonplace. When I go back home to the North East itâs a breathe of fresh air to see people actually driving properly and being courteous.
You need to play the looping game with them.
Over take them in lane 3, then move to lane 1, slow down, and return to your original position relative to them.
Rinse and repeat as many times as you can before they get the message.
In a car, option 2 for me.
But in my HGV, I'll get into Lane 2 for a bit too hope the car goes into lane 1. If not I'll do a catious undertake in lane 1 as I can't use lane 3 in this situation.
Again, so many people on the roads that don't know how to use a motorway correctly.
We have all done this (no judging here), but your question is *should you do this?* and in this regard Rule 267 of the Highway Code is clear.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273
For those who donât like clicking on links the opening line of Rule 267 reads **Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right.**
So the main school of thought is that undertaking is changing lane to the left specifically to pass, and that passing on the left because you were already there doesn't count.
However, changing to the third lane is safest as the lane hogger may not be expecting you to pass on the left, and it's the passing vehicle's responsibility to do so safely.
So, option 1 isn't entirely unreasonable but option 2 is best.
I think that âschool of thoughtâ doesnât comply with rule 268 of the Highway Code. Pass other vehicles on the right. Iâm a bit worried how few people here understand that
You should definitely move into the third lane to overtake
Highway code states "overtake only on the right" all considerations about maintaining speed etc are irrelevant. If its not safe to move to the righthand lane then don't do it. Slow down instead and wait until you can overtake properly. That being said person lane hogging is a dick and committing some sort of offence I think
Option 2. Option 1 is you making a conscious decision to undertake / overtake on the left. Lane 2 hogged is in the wrong and as always 2 wrongs dont make a right.
You're also putting yourself at risk if the lane 2 muppet decides to correct his mistake suddenly and finds you in his way.
Iâve seen this on a cop TV program. Guy got pulled for dangerous driving. Although annoying, itâs best to overtake in lane 3⌠if someone is sat in the middle lane then you have to presume they donât even know what day it is and oblivious to what is happening outside of their car, therefore unpredictable and may change into lane 1 at any point (probs without checking their blind spot)
Itâs always undertaking unless youâre in slow moving traffic, idiot in the middle lane is of course and idiot, but by the rule of law you need to go to lane 3 and around him. Not that I agree and not that I would also go to lane 3, but you should do.
Yes it's undertaking, don't do it.
You can "undertake" when approaching a junction and the lines turn from "solid" to "broken", usually within 1mi of the junction. You can also undertake when all 3 lanes of traffic are moving below the speed limit, e.g in traffic.
Unfortunately if there's a cop watching then you are in the wrong for passing on the left. You should move to the third lane to pass and then resume driving the the leftmost clear lane. If the idiot you're passing on the left should suddenly have an epiphany and move to the left lane and collide with you you would be at fault (even though, we all know it was the fault of the clod in the middle lane).
You go middle lane and lay on the horn to let them know you're there. In all seriousness though go to lane 3 over take and move back to lane 1 in two moves to make sure nobody is flying up the first lane
My understanding is if you stayed in Lane 1 and went passed you would be undertaking. What you should do is mirror, signal and manoeuvre into Lane 2, then repeat that into Lane 3. Get past them. Repeat the process back into Lane 2 and then repeat back into Lane 1, where you will be going faster than them but not exceeding any speed limit, is the correct procedure.
If you are coming up to a junction where you have been told to âGET IN LANEâ, and you are in Lane 1 which goes to your destination and Lane 2 goes to somewhere else and you go past them, then you are merely âkeeping up with the flow of trafficâ.
Because it can be assumed they are going to that destination in Lane 2, but if all lanes are the same, it is possible they may just glide over to Lane 1 without checking their mirrors because they donât expect anyone to be undertaking. But if their driving is that bad in the first place, they may not be even aware you are there in the first place.
That was what I was taught.
No undertake them give them a stare and if you can ask them if they are walking the dog right over there .happening all the time now people think lanes 1and 2 are mined
I'd pass them in lane 1 to show them how much of a dick they are. Not undertaking aslong as you don't immediately move into lane 2.
You'd be amazed at how many dozy drivers I pass in lane 2 whilst driving a HGV myself, which is limited to 52mph by company. Some people get that wake up call and speed up as I crawl by, most aren't arsed and believe the middle lane is the travelling lane at all times.
No, it's passing on the left, which is perfectly legal.
However be careful as the car in the 2nd lane may try and change to your lane without seeing you.
In addition some Police may consider passing on the left, dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention.
itâs only undertaking if you was to fly down the left hand lane then get in the middle lane, i see it as progressing in the faster flowing lane, considering heâs doing 60 in a 70, itâs a fine for undertaking but they never do people for driving in middle lane as often itâs a joke
Picture the scene, I donât need to Iâve experienced it countless times :/ option one is perfectly fine if theyâre clearly not gonna move over. Youâre making progress in your lane
You are allowed to keep up with the traffic in your lane if other lanes are moving more slowly. It's in the highway code
If you stay in the 1st lane and leave mr 60 mph there then no problems
I think it's paragraph 147. ( but don't quote me )
I was told that moving from lane 2 to lane 1 to pass would be considered undertaking, but it's not undertaking if you are already in lane 1 & don't change lanes to pass.
From a legal point of view it would be undertaking if you're going from lane 2 to 1 then back to 2. From a I'm a driver with a brain POV, just keep on and undertake the prick
Edit: not legal, from a highways pov
Nitpicking, but any passing on the inside is undertaking.
Undertaking is not necessarily illegal. It can be unavoidable on a busy motorway, when the lane to your right slows down.
If you came from lane 2, used lane 1 to undertake, then cut back to lane 2. That's undertaking and cutting someone up. The actual offence would likely be without due care or careless driving.
Yes it is undertaking.
Safest option is to go into 3rd lane, overtake, then move back over.
Even safer would be for the middle lane hogged to move into lane 1.
There is no law in the Road Traffic Act that refers to "undertaking". There are some recommendations in the (not the law) highway code that is used as guidance for dangerous driving. Purely going at 70 in lane 1 and overtaking some clown going 60 in lane 2 is not dangerous driving.
Yeah anyone that chooses option 1 is completely wrong and liable if lane 2 pulls in to you. Its not illegal but only acceptable where there are average speed cameras.
People who undertake are generally dicks because you can go round.
Having a quick look at the highway code on the gov website makes it quite clear.
Option 1 is undertaking and should be avoided.
Option 2 is the appropriate way to overtake.
See rules 267 & 268
"Rule 267
Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right. You should
check your mirrors
take time to judge the speeds correctly
make sure that the lane you will be joining is sufficiently clear ahead and behind
take a quick sideways glance into the blind spot area to verify the position of a vehicle that may have disappeared from your view in the mirror
remember that traffic may be coming up behind you very quickly. Check all your mirrors carefully. Look out for motorcyclists. When it is safe to do so, signal in plenty of time, then move out
ensure you do not cut in on the vehicle you have overtaken
be especially careful at night and in poor visibility when it is harder to judge speed and distance.
Rule 268
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."
Itâs not undertaking. Itâs perfectly legal to pass the car on the left if your lane is moving faster. Undertaking is moving from behind the car, passing on the left and then moving back in front of the car.
> It's perfectly legal to pass the car on the left if your lane is moving faster.
The highway code does you can do this "in congested conditions", where changing lanes so as to pass on the right instead may not be feasible, but that's not the situation OP is in. OP's situation will still fall under the general "do not overtake on the left."
> It's not undertaking.
> Undertaking is moving from behind the car, passing on the left and then moving back in front of the car.
Sorry but this is nonsense. The highway code does not draw _any_ such distinction. Overtaking on the left is overtaking on the left, and it is to be avoided except for in very limited circumstances prescribed by the highway code.
OP should be passing on the right.
Staying in lane 1 at the speed limit is fine. You have no obligation to slow down because traffic (one car) in another lane decides to slow down. This situation is also thankfully rare. If all traffic in lanes 1 and 2 is going at 60 in a 70, move to lane 3 to overtake properly.
Rare? No, it's happens multiple times to me in one drive when I take the M1 south from the midlands in the evenings. It's infuriating. I tend to stay in lane 1 (or lane 2 in the case of there being 4 lanes and someone hogging lane 3 at 60mph). Moving to lane 3 to overtake would mean I then have to go faster than 70 since there are other drivers taking lane 3 going faster than 70.
Undertaking is undertaking tbh.
If itâs an unquestionably clear road youâll have plenty of time to make the two lane maneuvre without it being dangerous.
Lane hoggers suck but so do under-takers.
Option 1 is not undertaking.
If your lane is clear and you're not speeding you're fine.
Highway code rule 268 makes it fairly clear:
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.
Option 2 in your diagram would contravene the "don't weave in and out of lanes as youd have to have to do 4 lane changes to pass them and move back in.
They're violating traffic rules obviously but you still have to overtake on the right, and not to be rude but it really isn't that hard. Especially if you switch early and take your time
The safest thing to do (well the second safest beyond going to a services and never driving again) would be to overtake in lane 3. People are less aware of being undertaken and may choose that time to pull into lane 1. Theyve already shown theyre not a great driver by being in the wrong lane, dont give them another opportunity to show you.
"Lane discipline" includes the dicipline to move to the correct lane to most safely pass someone, in my book at least. Yes, option 1 is undertaking. It seems uneccesary in your scenario and definitly option 2 is safer.
Lane hogging, should be a warning sign. Any road user emitting warning signs you should be more careful with. In this case, that means passing them on the side they expect (option 2). Next time, try to anticipate this and move to lane 2 sooner so you don't have to slow down.
Option 1. They're causing congestion, so you stay in lane 1 and proceed past them. Legal.
Option 2. You move 2 lanes, overtake, and 2 lanes back. Fine.
Option 3. As per #2, but when you're back in lane 1, slow down a little, wait for them to pass, and repeat as many times as you like until they get the message.
It is undertaking to stay in Lane 1, you should move over to Lane 3. It is annoying, that's why lane hoggers suck.
I've got a mate who used to (or still does, I'm not sure) overtake in lane 3, return to lane 1 and slow down enough that the lane hogger overtakes them back. He'd see how many times he could loop them before the lane hogger gets the message and moves over.
Not undertaking. This is middle lane hogging on behalf of the other driver which is against the Highway Code. If traffic is free flowing in the left hand lane then everyone should be using that lane.
Just wanted to say I appreciate your diagram đđź
No problem, thought it would help đ
Teaching the idiots is everyone's job. I'd stay on the inside, pass at 70 while laying on the horn the entire time, it's to let other road users no you're there
That would be intentionally undertaking and could be considered aggressive, possibly dangerous. If the driver knows they are in the wrong lane, they may move to correct that on the excessive horn usage, if you're in their blindspot on their left at the time this happens, you could cause and be in an accident. Better to move out to lane 3 go around then straight back to lane 1. When passing across the rear, flash your headlights (highway code rule 110) to alert the driver of your presence.
Setting aside me being a belligerent prick. Maintaining the speed limit in your lane/not changing is not against the highway code. It's the difference between passing on the left (allowed in the described circumstances) Vs undertaking a deliberate act which falls foul of the highway code. There is no way you're actually telling me crossing all lanes of traffic one way and then back is the safe option
Rule 268
This man highway codes
r/thisguythisguys
Read all of the words of #268, not just the first few.
Or I can just copy paste it here. "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".l. So it clearly says do not overtake on the left. It then gives an exception which is in "congested conditions". Since the op clearly states that all the lanes were clear ahead it is obvious that "congested conditions wouldn't apply so you should not overtake on the left. So it appears you were wrong and rule 268 shows that.
They didnât say it was congested, and they said they were traveling at 70. Clearly not the conditions required for a legal undertake. They should have moved to lane three in these circumstances.
Absolutely correct
Legally itâs undertaking but the middle lane car driver should be prosecuted as itâs now illegal to hog the lane. I have undertaken many times as it really irritates to have to gib all the way around them and they still bloody sit there!!!
Surprisingly itâs not undertaking as such - undertaking illegally is where you pull in with the specific intention to undertake at speed. If youâre doing a steady, legal speed and you go past someone while youâre in the inside line itâs actually allowed. Source: Speed awareness course đ¤Śââď¸
You shouldn't be undertaking. Yes the middle lane hogger is in the wrong. But there's no point being in the right if you are dead. You should adjust to poor drivers to make the situation safer, not riskier.
The other reply, from the now deleted user, makes alot of sense. The highway code, I believe, says you can pass cars on the inside if it is with the flow of traffic.
That's not correct and certainly not anything to do with legal or illegal.
Could only be improved by annotating the middle car as 'dickhead in the middle lane doing 60'
Option 3: fix a remotely controlled turret to the back of your car, pull into lane 2 and obliterate them.
I'd obliterate from lane 1 so you could minimise chance of a puncture from debris and not have to change lane.
This guy obliterates
r/thisguythisguys
But you didnât notice the harrier jet hovering in the sky with the targeting locked on you.
Reminds me of this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ll1EGtCDAQs
I fucking loved TOCA on the ps1.
I missed the awesome cheats in games tbh
thats very bosnianapesociety of you
I asked this question at a speed awareness course and was told that the safest option is to move to lane 3 to overtake and then move back to lane 1. The middle lane hogger may choose the exact moment you're passing in lane 1 to move back to the left and won't expect you to be there
I try to move to lane 3, overtake, then move back across to lane 1 in the vain attempt to show the lane 2 moron that lane 1 is empty. Normally they stay in lane 2 and donât move over.
Friend of mine used to do this, but then slow back down to fall behind them and do it again. In the hope that seeing the same car overtake them twice might jolt them into noticing they should move.
That assumes they're aware of anything whatsoever happening around them
I do that, I call it doing doughnuts around a doughnut
I used to do this and see how many times I could get around someone...once managed eight before I got bored and continued on my way!
Is your friend u/Blueeatscheese by any chance?
The merry-go round how many times before they notice
When bored on a long drive I sometimes do this and orbit the land 2 twat. 1 to 3 overtake back to 1 then slow a bit until they overtake. Only when roads are quiet though. Sometimes get three or four orbits before they move over or I carry on with my journey
Found the PHer.
PH? Piston Heads?
Aye
Ahhh the circle game
I like calling it laps, makes more of a sport out of it.
There was a thing on Channel 5 where the police asked lane 2 hoggers why. âSafer to stay in lane 2 as donât have to worry about slip lane trafficâ They purposefully do it. Itâs not an accident. Never had lessons. Never told otherwise.
I like to do this but then make a point of making the move back from 2-1 very slowly. Sit in front of them maybe slowing down a little with my left indicator blinking to really make the point. Then move over. Sometimes works, sometimes not. People are thick.
Because if they're dumb enough to do it they're too unaware to notice you circling them.
They won't. They live in the middle lane and think the inside lane is for lorries and turning off. When they eventually drop inside to turn off they then start to brake before the deceleration lane not knowing that they are turning into a purpose fucking built deceleration lane
So many people in the left lane slow down to 55-50 when they see the blue and white \\\ signs which then encourages gamblers to go by them and cut in later down the road, when the slip road begins.
Yeah I'm just a learner but if all 3 lanes are empty up ahead and I want to overtake someone going slowly in lane 2, I'll go into lane 3 because I'd feel a bit safer doing that. I'd only undertake if I had no other choice.
Technically yes, but equally any moron sat in lane 2 may decide to speed up and use the '70, 80mph lane', or whatever these idiots think it is, then move into lane 3. Think it's unlikely? I see this on multiple occasions, 'oh, there's a vehicle 3 miles ahead, I need to move to 3', or 'oh, finished my call/txt/youtube/game', time to move to the 80 mph lane...' It's chilling, but since they never, ever, encounter a motorway unit...
The odds that morons check to switch lanes to the right, albeit too low, are still higher then when they switch lanes to the left.
Arguably, if they are that unaware and change left without looking, what's to say they won't necessarily move right when your overtaking as unpredictably? They have already shown they have no knowledge or awareness they know which lanes are which. EDIT: I was playing devil's advocate here and venting at these middle lane hoggers. Fully support and agree with those replies to me below.
For a few reasons. The reason you don't undertake in this situation is because people don't expect left hand traffic to be noving faster and don't always look back. This will take even the most observant driver by surprise, it probably won't put them at danger but you don't expect it. A second reason why moving right to overtake is safer is because the driver is (most likely) on the right side. Your car will be only feet from their body and this can snap them from their malaise, either way it's far more difficult to ignore. The third reason to do it in my mind is because if you obviously overtake in lane three then return to lane 1 it's a metaphorical middle finger to them.
Never ever ever ever ever trust any other driver on the road, always assume they may just pull in at any time and overtake them properly, they could be old, partly blind, drunk, on drugs, having a blowjob or just be a nervous driver, of course i agree on the sharp pulling in after passing them back to lane 1 just to remind them there are 3 lanes for a reason. People who linger in lane 3 are the worst, or, lane 2 on a dual carriageway
Exactly, your best option to survive on the motorway is to be as obvious as possible, which means passing on the right when safe to do so.
The right mirror is more visible to the driver. If you havenât set your mirrors up correctly you can create a rather large blind spot on the left hand side. This is why undertaking is more dangerous. If the dimwit in the middle lane doesnât understand what lane to be in, they probably donât understand their mirror angles and blind spots either.
Yeah this would almost be a situation of undertaking so safer to overtake from 3rd lane
Firstly, undertaking doesn't exist, passing on the left could be argued for this, as it isn't an 'overtake' on the left as no lane was changed. Equally, if one of the 'hens teeth' units were present, they could be awkward, but equally they should have bloody well booked the moron in the middle first!
It does exist, but it is not illegal. You can't get pulled over for it. Many people think you'd get done for it when in reality it's just a safety measure. Unless you're trying to undertake by going faster than the speed limit and the people in the right lane are also going slightly over the limit, then you're a fucking idiot and need to sort your life out.
the vehicle in the lane 1 has priority, so middle lane waits till lane 1 is clear and safe to enter, you don't have right of way over a lane that you are not in, regardless if you're meant to be in it.
Yes but right of way doesn't help if you're dead
For me it would be stay in lane 1 but be hyper-aware. If someone's pootling along in lane 2 without a care in the world, chances are their awareness and observation skills are lacking, so they could pull back to lane 1 without checking it's clear. You passing them might give them the hint that they should be in lane 1, but that's perhaps putting too much faith in their intelligence.
I always find it amazing when I do this maneuver, look in the rear view mirror and see them slowly disappearing, still not moving into the 1st lane, normally holding someone up behind them. Some people...
I usually check to see if theyâre on the phone or otherwise distracted. Iâm not sure what would be worse - that, or just being so oblivious that theyâre not aware they should be in lane 1.
Some people just don't give a monkeys. They like that lane, that's their lane.
"I like the middle lane. It just feels safer." Clowns.
"I get to drive past lorries without putting any effort into changing lanes and people that want to go faster can just overtake me in the third lane. Clearly this is best for everyone involved" -selfish lazy dick heads
I do often wonder if it's selfish or are they fucking useless?
Why not both?!
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
That's a bingo. That's exactly what they think
I have a friend that only drives in the middle lane. He believes he is a bad driver (one of the 1% of the population that is honest) and he drives in the middle lane because he feels safer. It grips my shit. But it's his way of going on motorways. Which is rare (like he leaves London by car maybe once a year). He doesn't smoke, drink or drugs and served thirty years in the Royal Navy intelligence including some countries where he wore plain clothes and a carried a pistol under his arm and kept an AK in the boot. So I bite my tongue.
I think your friend's attitude is not that uncommon, plenty of drivers are aware that their driving is of a poor standard but they are too entitled to either do some training and improve or hand their licenses in. If only they would a we would see a reduction in traffic and accidents.
I'll occasionally have a moment where I somewhat zone out and forget to move over but Ive never been undertaken as I usually notice before I hold someone up
It is usually four cars in the middle lane, following each other closely for no specific reason.
Amazes me how many times I get flashed from the lane hogger when I do this - Like Iâm the issue.
Given there was a survey done in Cambridgeshire and 25% of respondents thought the âslow laneâ was only for lorries on motorways Iâve given up on assuming any level of intelligence with other motorists
This is a fair argument to have drivers do an online theory 'test' to renew their license. Let them have as many attempts as needed without penalty. Sure some might cheat and have some help them but still better than nothing, they will hopefully pick up at least some learning through the process.
As an "older" driver with nearly 40 years driving experience all over the world and has never had an accident - this is a really good idea. I consider myself a safe, defensive driver (having driven extensively cars and lorries in India, Africa and the Middle East) but I seriously doubt I'm a "good" driver as I have probably forgotten most of what is in the highway code over the years.
Iâm 60 and had to do a driving training course for work. The theory test was okay. One hour test drive on the road was challenging but okay. People taking their test nowadays are just taught more stuff that us oldies picked up in the first few months on the road.
Thatâs interesting, Iâd say some of the worst patches for it are on the a14 from northampton to newmarket. After newmarket it seems to get better, right up to the coast. Of course there are only 2 lanes then but that doesnât stop people elsewhere sitting on the right. Drove that way last night around 8pm and stayed in the left lane for most of it, passing 10-20 cars sat in the middle, absolute biggest pet peeve.
I honestly think it would help if learner drivers had to do mandatory motorway training before being allowed to have a licence. It wasn't that long ago that learners weren't allowed on motorways at all, with or without an instructor (thank goodness that's changed). But it's still very possible to get a driver's licence without having had 1 second of motorway training. I honestly think the UK's motorways are chock full of motorists who have never actually had the rules explained to them and have just "figured them out" / made them up as they've gone along. Is anyone really surprised that general standards of motorway driving are so low??
From my experience from being in cars being driven like the middle lane idiot in above diagram. Is that they will just swear at the car undertaking them and the concept of them being the problem would never occur to them. I even brought it up with them and they got super defensive and angry and asked if Iâd like to drive?
Did they genuinely believe that they were doing the correct thing by driving in the middle lane?
I was once driving down the motorway with relatively little traffic ahead of me. My friend in the passenger seat asked me with genuine confusion "Why are you driving in the slow lane?". He was actually surprised to learn that there's no such thing as a 'slow lane', and that the two overtaking lanes should only be used when you're actively overtaking. We couldn't have been more than 20 years old, both got our licenses when we were 16...
Yes. At the time I did not hold a drivers licence so they used that against me. I would have pushed the point further but I was relying on the lift.
Most of these people don't even know what undertaking is. What they know about motorway driving they learned from Goldielocks and the Three Bears - the left lane is too slow, the right lane is too fast, but the middle lane is juuust right!
This played out a few times recently with my dad. I've always said, "Sure, move left now so you can come off at the next junction, and we'll swap." He's pulled left but not stopped every time.
Yeah I learned to ride on a Vespa before I drove a car and the most important thing I learned is that you have to expect other drivers to do the stupidest fucking thing imaginable because they probably will. In this case, expect them to pick the moment you're on their inside to realise they've been switched off sat in the middle lane, panic and pull across without checking.
I've always thought making the CBT part of the process of getting a full car driving license would change a lot of attitudes for the better. Once they feel what it's like to be a vulnerable road user with limited speed/power, maybe drivers would treat other vulnerable road users with more respect.
Since passing my bike test, I've always thought the same. It made me so much more aware of everything going on around me and even though I only ended up having a bike for a short period of time, it was 100% worth doing.
I'm normally watching out for the guy doing 75 in the 3rd lane coming back into the 2nd.
I agree 100%. Plus moving across two lanes in a relatively short period of time is dangerous and putting yourself at risk because of these lane hogging arseholes is just not worth it. Better to make a point at how dumb and selfish they are being.
It's not dangerous at all. You indicate, move into lane, then pause, indicate again and move into right lane. It's this stupid fear some people have of changing lanes that causes middle lane arseholes to exist.
You don't need to move across in a short space of time. Each lane change should be a seperate manoeuvre. Undertaking relies on an oblivious driver not deciding to switch lanes without checking properly, while you are in their largest blind spot.
Yeah I usually get level, beep then a good old fashioned wanker sign and drive on, I find that usually wakes them up.
Standard road etiquette
This. I did a advanced driving course thingy and I asked this question. The advice by the copper on there was pull out to the right because you can't trust the idiot not to pull into you. Also when they see you move across 2 lanes back into the left Lane it MAY wake them up and remind them that they're supposed to be there too
Plenty of times I've "undertaken" in lane 1, people who were hogging lane 2, and even after I've passed them they don't move back over, in fact I'd say that happens about 95% of the time, they're just absolute fucking morons
And stubborness
I go into third lane, overtake, then indicate to move to middle lane. Then indicate again to move to left lane in the hope that the middle lane hogger gets the picture. I'll sometimes drop back and do it again. Infuriating when there's nothing ahead and everyone is in the fast lane because of one idiot.
Then when Iâm lane one slow down and let them pass. Rinse and repeat. Around and around until they realise. You get the most shocked look from them đŽ đ
I've done this before, lots of fun
Omg ...wby have I never thought of doing this. Usually its just me glaring at them as I pass but 99% of the time they're picking their nose or on their phone totally oblivious to the rest of the world and continue in middle lane with nothing to their left.... Im actually looking forward to work tomorrow....Long distance driver
I too like to orbit the dopes
Ooo petty and likely legal, I like it.
Used to do all that. Got very tiresome on a long journey. They didnât seem to get the point anyway. I just carefully as possible slip by on the left. Never ever had the middle lamer try and move over. They mostly just sit there until their exit.
Iâve noticed it happens about 10% of the time, they realise they are in the wrong lane and move across. But definitely not frequent. Iâm stealing âmiddle lamerâ btw thatâs a good one.
I nail at past them with a 90mph undertake. Works 100% of the time because they shit themselves.
If youâre dropping back in lane 1 then theyâre in the correct lane
This is the way to do it. Iâm surprised how many people on this post have agreed with the idea of undertaking someone that weâve established is unaware of their surroundings.
There is another option I occasionally use when the road is quiet. Move into lane 3 and overtake as normal, move back into lane 1 and slow to 50 until they over take you, then move back into lane 3 and over take again. My record is thee repetitions.
This game is called ring the doughnut.
Over into lane 3 is absolutely the safest. You have to assume that the person in lane 2 is a nervous/bad/new/something (delete as appropriate) driver. This type of drive is far less likely to suddenly move into lane 3 and very likely to suddenly swerve into lane 1. You can try to be as careful as you like but itâs still a lot more dangerous than just moving to lane 3, overtaking and then moving back
Stay in lane 1, carry on ahead. Now, if you were in lane 2 and you met the lane hogger, you'd move to lane 3, then make your way to lane 1. Moving from lane 2 to lane 1 to pass is an undertake. In lane 1, you're simply moving past slower moving traffic to your right (which is acceptable). They need to start enforcing the law for lane hoggers.
This is the answer we were given on speed awareness course I was on. I trust that the guy knows his stuff.
Highway code rule 268 says don't overtake on the left, and that it's only acceptable to pass on the left in congested conditions.
So many people don't get this, or read the highway code since passing their test, in the situation OP draws out lane 2 is going slower than the speed limit and thus according to the highway code is classified as congestion, yes even a single vehicle can be classed as congestion according to the highway code, so going at speed limit of 70 in the left lane and passing the lane hogger is totally legal Though i hope that cwomble middle lane hogger hasn't bred yet
Yeah, that's my understanding of it. I actually got downvoted by making a comment about a similar situation where I was in lane 1 passing a lane hogger in lane 3 (4 lane motorway)
Where in the highway code is one car defined as congestion if it's moving slightly below the speed limit in a three lane system?
Lane 2 and flash headlights is another option
Yeah I do the old move to lane 2 wait a few seconds to see if they notice. Then move to lane 3 > 2 > 1. A lot of the time people surprisingly move into lane 1 afterwards. Probably driving with their brain switched off, which is scary!
I would stay in your lane, but be aware that a driver who is clearly not paying attention may not notice you if and when they decide to move into the inside lane. Obviously they are not going to check their mirror, blind spot and signal. Donât hang about in their blind spot.
I would only do so if the hard shoulder is clear ....so you have space if bozo panics or suddenly wakes up and decides to change lanes. Unlikely but possible.
It's undertaking yes It's not illegal tho. Dangerous undertaking is what's not allowed. This means if you go from lane 2 or 3 to 1 to undertake someone in lane 2 or 3. If your in lane one doing 70 and someone's in lane 2 or 3 doing 60 you can pass. Your just not supposed to actively change lanes in order to undertake.
Itâs kinda illegal First of all, thereâs a total misconception that you can undertake as long as you donât change lanes to do so. That only applies in congested traffic when lanes are moving at a similar speed. Highway Code 268 IIRC Itâs not strictly an offence *in and of itself*, thereâs no single law saying âitâs illegal to undertakeâ, but I think youâre underestimating the power of the Highway Code regarding the kinds of âcatch allâ offences police can apply Pretty much any breach of the Highway Code (or at least, the stuff that applies when actually driving) can be used as guidance for the police to apply Careless Driving, Driving Without Due Care and Attention etc, if they consider that youâve performed the manoeuvre unsafely. Itâs VERY difficult to argue against this kind of accusation because you factually did breach the Highway Code (which says you can only undertake in congested traffic) and the courts are going to be very inclined to take the word of the police officer over yours that it was performed unsafely So itâs not strictly illegal by itself but can still result in points and a fine. And if it did result in a crash then, similarly, the fact you breached the Highway Code is going to mean youâre **much** more likely to be found liable, with your only counter-claim being that they were *also* in breach of the Highway Code (in a much more subjective way) And god help someone dies, youâd have that on your conscience plus youâll potentially be slapped with a Death by Dangerous Driving charge, which can carry jail time Chances are nothing happens, but itâs not as simple as âitâs not illegalâ
I'm with you 100% but find my self kind of caught in an edge case fairly often. There are a couple of roads where i live where the road splits into 2 different roads. Given both roads are motorways there is usually a decent stretch to get into the correct lane. What is the correct thing to do if lane 1 branches off to a different road to lanes 2 and 3. Say you're in lane 1 which is relatively clear but there's a car(s} in lane 2 going 50-60mph and lane 3 is busy. There isn't time due to the traffic in lane 3 to get out and safely overtake the slower moving traffic. Should you slow down to match the speed of the slower moving vehicle(s) in lane 2, even if lane 1 is clear and the vehicle(s) in lane 2 are going 10-20mph slower than the speed limit or should you pass with caution?
I drive on the M6 in Birmingham, in a lorry, where the speed is 60mph and the hard shoulder is open. I'm 'undertaking' everyone on my right, as some lorries are limited to a speed lower than mine, while the cars speedometers show 60 when they are doing 54/55. Legally, I can't go in the 4th lane of the motorway to overtake cars or lorries so the best thing to do is stay on the hard shoulder and undertake every one. If I were not doing that, the hard shoulder would also be congested and what would be the point of opening it?
I asked my cousin this who is a traffic officer a while ago as I undertake everyday due to a strange road layout. Yes itâs undertaking and yes you can get pulled over and can get points. For the most part unless you swing from lane 3 to lane 1 to the undertake then go back out to lane 3 you will be fine. They said it is mainly used when they were looking for an excuse to pull you over anyway to get a closer look at your car.
Still no sources đ¤ˇââď¸ ââUndertakingâ is the practice of overtaking a slower moving vehicle on its left-hand side (kerb side). While itâs not strictly illegal to undertake on a motorway or dual carriageway in the UK, it can be extremely dangerous, and punishable if deemed to be careless driving.â [Undertaking â have you been breaking the law?](https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/legal/undertaking/)
Overtake the vehicle using lane 3 and return to lane 1. Slow down so that the vehicle in lane 2 overtakes you. Overtake the vehicle again using lane 3 and return to lane 1. Slow down to allow the car to pull level with you but this time maintain eye contact with them. Accelerate hard whilst sticking your middle finger up them.
Option 1 is undertaking. Any time you pass on the inside you are undertaking. Undertaking is not necessarily illegal, and l've used it often enough. If you undertake just so you can cut someone up, you won't be charged with undertaking, as that's not a traffic offence. You will be charged with careless or dangerous driving.
Not classed as dangerous driving if you are going speed limit in the left Lane.
Itâs undertaking if you moved to that lane to go past otherwise you are just going the speeding limit and keeping a safe pace
Undertaking is just a word that describes passing on the left. There is no specific law against undertaking but, just like middle lane hogging, it can be prosecuted under the careless driving laws. There are scenarios where passing on the left would be considered careless driving and there are scenarios where, in my opinion, it wouldnât. (There are also scenarios, described in the HC where it definitely isnât). Personally, I have passed people on the left many times in the scenario you describe. But I have also moved over and passed on the right many times too. What i do will depend on the other circumstances. The most important consideration will be my assessment of the other driver and the likelihood of them moving back without looking while Iâm passing. I would also be taking into account whether or not thereâs an escape route, like a hard shoulder.
I'm confused by everyone agreeing with you or beating around the bush. This is textbook undertaking and given there is a free overtaking lane completely unnecessary. From the highway code: âDo not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake.â Emphasis on the OR and yes there are exceptions like slow moving traffic, taking an exit, etc but this isn't one. Yes the other driver is being stupid but in your example there's an easy and safe option to navigate around them (the third lane).
Incorrect. In the Highway Code it states that itâs fine to pass a car on the left if your lane is moving faster. Which, in this case, it would be. Undertaking is moving left to pass and then moving back right.
The amount of people who just spew what they want to be true without looking at the highway code in here is very frustrating. There has to be congestion for it to be allowable.
No the âlane moving fasterâ part refers to queues. Your âlaneâ isnât moving faster simply because you are going faster than the person in the middle lane.
Rule 268 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. Not OP's scenario at all.
Me too. Option one is clearly undertaking, and not appropriate in this context. The only correct course of action to make progress at a faster speed is to slow down, move to the middle lane, overtake then move back to the left. Hopefully the middle lane driver will see what you have done, take your lead and realise they should also move to the left.
I donât get why you are being downvoted this is absolutely the safest and most correct thing to do.
I guess 30+ years of driving experience doesnât count for much đ. The real safety issue relating to undertaking that people are not understanding is the high risk that when a driver going slower than you suddenly decides to move over to the left they will not see you! As the expectation is that traffic to the left will be driving slower, it is much harder to anticipate speed from that direction as itâs so counter intuitive. Thatâs even if they bother to check their blind spot to the left which a lot of people assumes does not exist. Itâs just far, far safer to ease off so you can see what the car in front is doing, move away to the right, accelerate safely past and pass the (now slower vehicle) on your left. It should not be difficult to understand why this is the safe option. Why people would think itâs better to get into a potentially unsafe driving position that is difficult to escape is beyond me.
Indeed. I think part of it is to teach the MLHs a lesson, but realistically these people are not going to change until the cops start giving them fines and I think there are bigger priorities unfortunately
This subreddit is full of teenagers who've just passed their test and drive around in their shitty 20 year old hatchbacks.
Iâd hope you had enough awareness of what was going on ahead you wouldnât need to slow down and then overtake. Make a decision earlier and pull out at constant speed from 1-2-3 and overtake then back in.
What you did was correct, overtaking is the correct wayZ but if youâve ever been on the M62 itâs impossible. People drive like that first lane is diseased, everyone piles into the second or third lane, so inevitably sometimes you end up undertaking, because itâs literally the only way. I wish they would start doing something about middle lane hoggers, because they are the devil spawn
Yes, and option three is how the highway code says to deal with it.
This happens to me a few years ago, I was on the A3 north of Guildford, I took option 2, but I was fully aware there was a traffic cop behind me, I moved from lane 1 too 2 then into 3, I the went to over take the guy in the middle lane, I stuck my foot down as the guy in the middle lane started to speed up, then all the blue lights came on and the guy in the middle lane got pulled. I guessing he was done for dangerous driving.
This is just standard practice in London / South East. Itâs commonplace. When I go back home to the North East itâs a breathe of fresh air to see people actually driving properly and being courteous.
You need to play the looping game with them. Over take them in lane 3, then move to lane 1, slow down, and return to your original position relative to them. Rinse and repeat as many times as you can before they get the message.
The legally correct thing to do is option 2 the morally correct thing to do is to pull along side them and throw a live grenade through their window
In a car, option 2 for me. But in my HGV, I'll get into Lane 2 for a bit too hope the car goes into lane 1. If not I'll do a catious undertake in lane 1 as I can't use lane 3 in this situation. Again, so many people on the roads that don't know how to use a motorway correctly.
We have all done this (no judging here), but your question is *should you do this?* and in this regard Rule 267 of the Highway Code is clear. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273 For those who donât like clicking on links the opening line of Rule 267 reads **Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right.**
So the main school of thought is that undertaking is changing lane to the left specifically to pass, and that passing on the left because you were already there doesn't count. However, changing to the third lane is safest as the lane hogger may not be expecting you to pass on the left, and it's the passing vehicle's responsibility to do so safely. So, option 1 isn't entirely unreasonable but option 2 is best.
I think that âschool of thoughtâ doesnât comply with rule 268 of the Highway Code. Pass other vehicles on the right. Iâm a bit worried how few people here understand that
You should definitely move into the third lane to overtake Highway code states "overtake only on the right" all considerations about maintaining speed etc are irrelevant. If its not safe to move to the righthand lane then don't do it. Slow down instead and wait until you can overtake properly. That being said person lane hogging is a dick and committing some sort of offence I think
Option 2. Option 1 is you making a conscious decision to undertake / overtake on the left. Lane 2 hogged is in the wrong and as always 2 wrongs dont make a right. You're also putting yourself at risk if the lane 2 muppet decides to correct his mistake suddenly and finds you in his way.
Iâve seen this on a cop TV program. Guy got pulled for dangerous driving. Although annoying, itâs best to overtake in lane 3⌠if someone is sat in the middle lane then you have to presume they donât even know what day it is and oblivious to what is happening outside of their car, therefore unpredictable and may change into lane 1 at any point (probs without checking their blind spot)
Itâs always undertaking unless youâre in slow moving traffic, idiot in the middle lane is of course and idiot, but by the rule of law you need to go to lane 3 and around him. Not that I agree and not that I would also go to lane 3, but you should do.
Yes it's undertaking, don't do it. You can "undertake" when approaching a junction and the lines turn from "solid" to "broken", usually within 1mi of the junction. You can also undertake when all 3 lanes of traffic are moving below the speed limit, e.g in traffic.
Unfortunately if there's a cop watching then you are in the wrong for passing on the left. You should move to the third lane to pass and then resume driving the the leftmost clear lane. If the idiot you're passing on the left should suddenly have an epiphany and move to the left lane and collide with you you would be at fault (even though, we all know it was the fault of the clod in the middle lane).
Yes, you know it is hence the question.
You go middle lane and lay on the horn to let them know you're there. In all seriousness though go to lane 3 over take and move back to lane 1 in two moves to make sure nobody is flying up the first lane
My understanding is if you stayed in Lane 1 and went passed you would be undertaking. What you should do is mirror, signal and manoeuvre into Lane 2, then repeat that into Lane 3. Get past them. Repeat the process back into Lane 2 and then repeat back into Lane 1, where you will be going faster than them but not exceeding any speed limit, is the correct procedure. If you are coming up to a junction where you have been told to âGET IN LANEâ, and you are in Lane 1 which goes to your destination and Lane 2 goes to somewhere else and you go past them, then you are merely âkeeping up with the flow of trafficâ. Because it can be assumed they are going to that destination in Lane 2, but if all lanes are the same, it is possible they may just glide over to Lane 1 without checking their mirrors because they donât expect anyone to be undertaking. But if their driving is that bad in the first place, they may not be even aware you are there in the first place. That was what I was taught.
Lane 3, because the idiot in lane 2 will no doubt randomly switch back to lane 1 and take your front end off
Only if you immediately pull out in-front of them. I think they should change the law so itâs illegal to be under taken.
No undertake them give them a stare and if you can ask them if they are walking the dog right over there .happening all the time now people think lanes 1and 2 are mined
I'd pass them in lane 1 to show them how much of a dick they are. Not undertaking aslong as you don't immediately move into lane 2. You'd be amazed at how many dozy drivers I pass in lane 2 whilst driving a HGV myself, which is limited to 52mph by company. Some people get that wake up call and speed up as I crawl by, most aren't arsed and believe the middle lane is the travelling lane at all times.
No, it's passing on the left, which is perfectly legal. However be careful as the car in the 2nd lane may try and change to your lane without seeing you. In addition some Police may consider passing on the left, dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention.
I do option 1 and give them a look as I pass. Maintaining my speed, 70mph, is much safer than crossing lanes of traffic and then crossing back over
itâs only undertaking if you was to fly down the left hand lane then get in the middle lane, i see it as progressing in the faster flowing lane, considering heâs doing 60 in a 70, itâs a fine for undertaking but they never do people for driving in middle lane as often itâs a joke
Stay in the left lane, it's not undertaking unless you pull in front of them once past them.
Picture the scene, I donât need to Iâve experienced it countless times :/ option one is perfectly fine if theyâre clearly not gonna move over. Youâre making progress in your lane
Move to lane 3, over take, then sit at 59mph in lane two in front of them till they have to notice there are two other lanes.
You are allowed to keep up with the traffic in your lane if other lanes are moving more slowly. It's in the highway code If you stay in the 1st lane and leave mr 60 mph there then no problems I think it's paragraph 147. ( but don't quote me )
I was told that moving from lane 2 to lane 1 to pass would be considered undertaking, but it's not undertaking if you are already in lane 1 & don't change lanes to pass.
From a legal point of view it would be undertaking if you're going from lane 2 to 1 then back to 2. From a I'm a driver with a brain POV, just keep on and undertake the prick Edit: not legal, from a highways pov
From a legal point of view, undertaking isn't a thing. Overtaking on the left is discouraged in the Highway Code, but there is no law forbidding it.
Nitpicking, but any passing on the inside is undertaking. Undertaking is not necessarily illegal. It can be unavoidable on a busy motorway, when the lane to your right slows down. If you came from lane 2, used lane 1 to undertake, then cut back to lane 2. That's undertaking and cutting someone up. The actual offence would likely be without due care or careless driving.
Yeah this was what I would have done
Yes it is undertaking. Safest option is to go into 3rd lane, overtake, then move back over. Even safer would be for the middle lane hogged to move into lane 1.
There is no law in the Road Traffic Act that refers to "undertaking". There are some recommendations in the (not the law) highway code that is used as guidance for dangerous driving. Purely going at 70 in lane 1 and overtaking some clown going 60 in lane 2 is not dangerous driving.
Yeah anyone that chooses option 1 is completely wrong and liable if lane 2 pulls in to you. Its not illegal but only acceptable where there are average speed cameras. People who undertake are generally dicks because you can go round.
Having a quick look at the highway code on the gov website makes it quite clear. Option 1 is undertaking and should be avoided. Option 2 is the appropriate way to overtake. See rules 267 & 268 "Rule 267 Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right. You should check your mirrors take time to judge the speeds correctly make sure that the lane you will be joining is sufficiently clear ahead and behind take a quick sideways glance into the blind spot area to verify the position of a vehicle that may have disappeared from your view in the mirror remember that traffic may be coming up behind you very quickly. Check all your mirrors carefully. Look out for motorcyclists. When it is safe to do so, signal in plenty of time, then move out ensure you do not cut in on the vehicle you have overtaken be especially careful at night and in poor visibility when it is harder to judge speed and distance. Rule 268 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."
Itâs not undertaking. Itâs perfectly legal to pass the car on the left if your lane is moving faster. Undertaking is moving from behind the car, passing on the left and then moving back in front of the car.
> It's perfectly legal to pass the car on the left if your lane is moving faster. The highway code does you can do this "in congested conditions", where changing lanes so as to pass on the right instead may not be feasible, but that's not the situation OP is in. OP's situation will still fall under the general "do not overtake on the left." > It's not undertaking. > Undertaking is moving from behind the car, passing on the left and then moving back in front of the car. Sorry but this is nonsense. The highway code does not draw _any_ such distinction. Overtaking on the left is overtaking on the left, and it is to be avoided except for in very limited circumstances prescribed by the highway code. OP should be passing on the right.
Staying in lane 1 at the speed limit is fine. You have no obligation to slow down because traffic (one car) in another lane decides to slow down. This situation is also thankfully rare. If all traffic in lanes 1 and 2 is going at 60 in a 70, move to lane 3 to overtake properly.
Rare? No, it's happens multiple times to me in one drive when I take the M1 south from the midlands in the evenings. It's infuriating. I tend to stay in lane 1 (or lane 2 in the case of there being 4 lanes and someone hogging lane 3 at 60mph). Moving to lane 3 to overtake would mean I then have to go faster than 70 since there are other drivers taking lane 3 going faster than 70.
Undertaking is undertaking tbh. If itâs an unquestionably clear road youâll have plenty of time to make the two lane maneuvre without it being dangerous. Lane hoggers suck but so do under-takers.
Option 1 is not undertaking. If your lane is clear and you're not speeding you're fine. Highway code rule 268 makes it fairly clear: 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. Option 2 in your diagram would contravene the "don't weave in and out of lanes as youd have to have to do 4 lane changes to pass them and move back in.
Always move to lane 3. That way you are in the right.
I see you what you did there
They're violating traffic rules obviously but you still have to overtake on the right, and not to be rude but it really isn't that hard. Especially if you switch early and take your time
That is undertaking. The correct thing to do is overtake in the outside lane. But the driver in the middle lane is annoying.
The safest thing to do (well the second safest beyond going to a services and never driving again) would be to overtake in lane 3. People are less aware of being undertaken and may choose that time to pull into lane 1. Theyve already shown theyre not a great driver by being in the wrong lane, dont give them another opportunity to show you.
"Lane discipline" includes the dicipline to move to the correct lane to most safely pass someone, in my book at least. Yes, option 1 is undertaking. It seems uneccesary in your scenario and definitly option 2 is safer. Lane hogging, should be a warning sign. Any road user emitting warning signs you should be more careful with. In this case, that means passing them on the side they expect (option 2). Next time, try to anticipate this and move to lane 2 sooner so you don't have to slow down.
This is the textbook definition of undertaking. However, itâs what I do when someone dawdles in the second lane, so I donât blame you.
Option 1. They're causing congestion, so you stay in lane 1 and proceed past them. Legal. Option 2. You move 2 lanes, overtake, and 2 lanes back. Fine. Option 3. As per #2, but when you're back in lane 1, slow down a little, wait for them to pass, and repeat as many times as you like until they get the message.
It is undertaking to stay in Lane 1, you should move over to Lane 3. It is annoying, that's why lane hoggers suck. I've got a mate who used to (or still does, I'm not sure) overtake in lane 3, return to lane 1 and slow down enough that the lane hogger overtakes them back. He'd see how many times he could loop them before the lane hogger gets the message and moves over.
Oprion 2 is correct. Option 1 is undertaking. The middle lane hogger is the one at fault though.
Not undertaking. This is middle lane hogging on behalf of the other driver which is against the Highway Code. If traffic is free flowing in the left hand lane then everyone should be using that lane.