Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Driving in the middle lane

Options
135678

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    celticbest
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    Some useful information for some people on here....

    MotorwayLaneUsage-1.jpg


  • Options
    #63
    celticbest
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Oh dear. Perhaps it's you who don't know the ROTR?

    As to why a Garda didn't pull you it's anyone's guess.

    'cause I didn't do anything illegal....


  • Options
    #64
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    celticbest wrote: »
    'cause I didn't do anything illegal....

    No. I reckon you did.


  • Options
    #65
    ironclaw
    Registered Users Posts: 8,004 ✭✭✭ironclaw


    @celticbest, ROTR are an interpretation of the law and 'good practise' They are themselves not the law. You won't be prosecuted with paragraphs read from the ROTR.

    And at 80km/h, your well above 'slow / slower moving traffic'. That, in my eyes, is for traffic at a crawl. If everyone just made a point of driving correctly and not going 'ah shure, its grand' then we'd be well on our way. Even at 3am, I'd go lane 1 to 3 and back if I have to. But I'm sure many just rolls the eyes and pass on the left. Your as bad as the lane 2 driver if that is what you do.


  • Options
    #66
    celticbest
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    ironclaw wrote: »
    @celticbest, ROTR are an interpretation of the law and 'good practise' They are themselves not the law. You won't be prosecuted with paragraphs read from the ROTR.

    And at 80km/h, your well above 'slow / slower moving traffic'. That, in my eyes, is for traffic at a crawl. If everyone just made a point of driving correctly and not going 'ah shure, its grand' then we'd be well on our way. Even at 3am, I'd go lane 1 to 3 and back if I have to. But I'm sure many just rolls the eyes and pass on the left. Your as bad as the lane 2 driver if that is what you do.
    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    No. I reckon you did.

    Please read post #60 again, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90044078&postcount=60

    Point 3 clearly states that you are allowed to undertake if traffic to your right is moving more slowly, do you seriously think it’s safer to go from Lane 1 to Lane 3 & back to Lane 1 because someone else hogging lane 2 , c’mon now be serious.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Undertaking (as celticbest described) is never ok nor legal.

    Like I said, it depends on the situation. If you have two lanes of built up traffic in the middle and the right, and the left lane is moving faster (I have seen this numerous times on the M50) then its not illegal for those cars in the left lane to be passing the cars in the right hand lanes.


  • Options
    #68
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Learner%20Drivers/Rules_of_the_road.pdf

    Page 52.


  • Options
    #69
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    celticbest wrote: »
    Please read post #60 again, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90044078&postcount=60

    Point 3 clearly states that you are allowed to undertake if traffic to your right is moving more slowly, do you seriously think it’s safer to go from Lane 1 to Lane 3 & back to Lane 1 because someone else hogging lane 2 , c’mon now be serious.

    Yes I know what it says, but the issue is one of how it's interpreted.

    The key words are "slow moving traffic" not "slower moving traffic". This means congested and stop/start conditions where it's actually difficult to match speeds.

    Passing someone on their lhs just because your lane is going faster is illegal. Gardai prosecute people for doing it too.


  • Options
    #70
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Learner%20Drivers/Rules_of_the_road.pdf

    Page 52.

    Thats just backing up what Im saying to be honest.

    Do you really think that if the traffic in the middle and right hand lanes are moving slowly (relatively speaking) then the cars in a more empty left hand lane are supposed to slow down to match their speed needlessly?


  • Options
    #71
    Thoie
    Registered Users Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    Why do people say that middle-lane hoggers are hard to police? Could the gardaí not just stand on an overpass with a camera, look at the cars approaching in an outer lane when they're not overtaking anything, and pop a fine in the post to them?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    Thats just backing up what Im saying to be honest.

    Do you really think that if the traffic in the middle and right hand lanes are moving slowly (relatively speaking) then the cars in a more empty left hand lane are supposed to slow down to match their speed needlessly?

    Unfortunately yes they are. It's a pain in the swiss but there you go.


  • Options
    #73
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Unfortunately yes they are. It's a pain in the swiss but there you go.

    This is where the definition of slow moving traffic gets called into play, and where the grey area exists. As far as Im concerned, in any built up traffic that is travelling under the speed limit (as built up traffic tends to be), it cannot be considered an offense for one lane to be travelling quicker than the other; thats just the nature of built up traffic.

    Its also where common sense comes into play. The chances of anyone ever being done for undertaking where they are travelling in built up traffic in the left lane that is moving quicker than the right hand lane would be virtually nil. The chances of being done for undertaking at all in this country are extremely remote at the best of times...


  • Options
    #74
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    This is where the definition of slow moving traffic gets called into play, and where the grey area exists. As far as Im concerned, in any built up traffic that is travelling under the speed limit (as built up traffic tends to be), it cannot be considered an offense for one lane to be travelling quicker than the other; thats just the nature of built up traffic.

    Slow not slower remember.


  • Options
    #75
    celticbest
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Learner%20Drivers/Rules_of_the_road.pdf

    Page 52.

    Eh, I know how to overtake...
    If you have good reason to change lanes, use your mirrors and check in plenty of time to ensure that the way is clear. To check your blind spot
    when travelling at speed, take a quick sideways glance to check the
    position of a vehicle that may have disappeared from your view in the
    mirror.

    I don't see how someone hogging a lane is a good reason for me to move across 2 Lanes of traffic & then back across 2 lanes just to overtake someone who doesn’t know how to drive when the Lane you are in is Traffic free.

    As I stated I don’t exceed the speed limit so therefore would not be able to undertake them if they drove correctly, I would only have to move out into lane 2 and then back into lane 1, I’m not endangering myself by manoeuvring across multiple lanes because some fool feels like hogging a lane.

    Also if someone that is hogging Lane 2 wants to move to Lane 1 so they can exit at the next Junction 100m ahead even though there is an Auxiliary lane between junctions do they not have to check their mirrors before switching Lanes anyway or do the ROTR still not apply to them?

    Again please read Page 52 which states you are allowed to undertake slower moving traffic, it does not state a minimum/maximum speed at which this is allowed it just states
    Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane.


  • Options
    #76
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    This is where the definition of slow moving traffic gets called into play, and where the grey area exists. As far as Im concerned, in any built up traffic that is travelling under the speed limit (as built up traffic tends to be), it cannot be considered an offense for one lane to be travelling quicker than the other; thats just the nature of built up traffic.

    Its also where common sense comes into play. The chances of anyone ever being done for undertaking where they are travelling in built up traffic in the left lane that is moving quicker than the right hand lane would be virtually nil. The chances of being done for undertaking at all in this country are extremely remote at the best of times...

    I realise that this is from the UK but the principles are identical....

    https://www.gov.uk/motorways-253-to-273/overtaking-267-to-269

    Looks pretty clear cut to me.


  • Options
    #77
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Slow not slower remember.

    Define slow? On a long straight multi-lane carraigeway with a speed limit of 100km/h, on a dry clear day, one could very well argue that 95km/h is slow...


  • Options
    #78
    celticbest
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    I realise that this is from the UK but the principles are identical....

    https://www.gov.uk/motorways-253-to-273/overtaking-267-to-269

    Looks pretty clear cut to me.

    UK rules do not apply here...


  • Options
    #79
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    Define slow? On a long straight multi-lane carraigeway with a speed limit of 100km/h, on a dry clear day, one could very well argue that 95km/h is slow...

    That's just being silly.


  • Options
    #80
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    celticbest wrote: »
    UK rules do not apply here...

    Funnily enough I already mentioned that.

    What is relevant is the enhanced guidance on what "slow moving" means.


  • Options
    #81
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    I realise that this is from the UK but the principles are identical....

    https://www.gov.uk/motorways-253-to-273/overtaking-267-to-269

    Looks pretty clear cut to me.

    Is it? Define similar speeds? If one lane is doing 80km/h and the other 90km/h is that considered to be similar?

    There is no point in posting interpretations of the law; any of those sites (be it a UK side, RSA, ROTR etc) are just interpreting the traffic act in the same way that you and I are doing, and their interpretation holds no more weight legally than either of ours does.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    Define slow? On a long straight multi-lane carraigeway with a speed limit of 100km/h, on a dry clear day, one could very well argue that 95km/h is slow...

    Congested. Stop/start. 1st gear. That sort of thing.

    95kph? I'd think not.


  • Options
    #83
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    That's just being silly.

    Silly how? Have you got a legal defintion of what slow means? Slow compared to what exactly?


  • Options
    #84
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Congested. Stop/start. 1st gear. That sort of thing.

    95kph? I'd think not.

    Nowhere in the traffic act does it mention congested, stop/start, 1st gear etc.


  • Options
    #85
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    Is it? Define similar speeds? If one lane is doing 80km/h and the other 90km/h is that considered to be similar?

    There is no point in posting interpretations of the law; any of those sites (be it a UK side, RSA, ROTR etc) are just interpreting the traffic act in the same way that you and I are doing, and their interpretation holds no more weight legally than either of ours does.

    Insert "congested" and it suddenly makes sense.

    There's plenty of point in posting interpretations - it's a discussion board isn't it?


  • Options
    #86
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,638 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    djimi wrote: »
    Nowhere in the traffic act does it mention congested, stop/start, 1st gear etc.

    You asked me to define slow. I just did. Whether that's mentioned in the RTA (it isn't) isn't relevant to how I'd define the term however.


  • Options
    #87
    ironclaw
    Registered Users Posts: 8,004 ✭✭✭ironclaw


    djimi wrote: »
    Nowhere in the traffic act does it mention congested, stop/start, 1st gear etc.

    While I agree with you, I think common sense has to apply here. On a motorway 'slow' moving traffic would be traffic moving at or significantly under the minimum speed limit. 80km/h versus 100km/h is hardly significant. Given the minimum speed limit on a motorway is 50km/h (Termed a 'slow' vehicle by that very blue sign) then I would consider 'slow' to be anything under 50km/h.


  • Options
    #88
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    You asked me to define slow. I just did. Whether that's mentioned in the RTA (it isn't) isn't relevant to how I'd define the term however.

    The point is that neither of our interpretations are relevant; the only thing that matters is how the Gardai/a judge defines slow moving traffic. The traffic act does not define what slow moving traffic means.


  • Options
    #89
    celticbest
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Funnily enough I already mentioned that.

    What is relevant is the enhanced guidance on what "slow moving" means.

    Until our ROTR are changed to clarify more clearly what is slow & what is not, I will continue to drive as I currently do.

    If a car is hogging Lane 3 doing 80km/h & a HGV is in Lane 2 also hogging it doing 80km/h while Lane 1 is Traffic free, should no vehicle pass in lane 1 and everything move to Lane 3 with the intention of overtaking thus bringing the Motorway to a standstill?

    I’m sure we’ve all heard of a 'Jamiton'.


  • Options
    #90
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    ironclaw wrote: »
    While I agree with you, I think common sense has to apply here. On a motorway 'slow' moving traffic would be traffic moving at or significantly under the minimum speed limit. 80km/h versus 100km/h is hardly significant. Given the minimum speed limit on a motorway is 50km/h (Termed a 'slow' vehicle by that very blue sign) then I would consider 'slow' to be anything under 50km/h.

    There is no minimum speed limit on an Irish motorway (or any other road). Vehicles on motorways must be capable of travelling at 50km/h; it doesnt mean that its illegal to travel slower than that.

    I know Im arguing the point, but Im simply trying to point out that legally there is no definition of slow moving. In my opinion (and thats all it is), in built up traffic that is travelling under the speed limit, it cannot be seen as an offense for traffic in the left hand lane to travelling faster than traffic in the right hand lane. Maybe a Garda might view it differently (I have certainly never seen it happen in my years of driving).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    celticbest wrote: »
    Until our ROTR are changed to clarify more clearly what is slow & what is not, I will continue to drive as I currently do.

    If a car is hogging Lane 3 doing 80km/h & a HGV is in Lane 2 also hogging it doing 80km/h while Lane 1 is Traffic free, should no vehicle pass in lane 1 and everything move to Lane 3 with the intention of overtaking thus bringing the Motorway to a standstill?

    I’m sure we’ve all heard of a 'Jamiton'.

    Just to be clear, Im arguing where there is built up traffic, ie where there are two/three solid lines of cars travelling at different speeds.

    If you are talking about passing single cars on the inside then you have no defence here; you are in the wrong. A single car will not (in my opinion anyway) be considered to be slow moving traffic, no matter what speed they might be going.


Advertisement