"Overtaking" in the left lane of motorway

Just wondered what your thoughts are on this in general.

Driving this morning on the M50 between cherrywood and sandyford, heavy morning traffic, I entered the motorway and at next available opportunity, entered the overtaking lane to pass car in left lane, this was in and around the carrickmines exit. There are loads of cars in front of me in the overtaking lane, but none in the driving lane. I pulled back over as soon as I had finished overtaking. I never accelerated any more, I continued to drive at 100kmph but the cars in the right lane (10-12) all slowed, so I ended up passing them all out on the left, I never went back to the overtaking lane as my exit was next.

What should I have done here?
should I have slowed down to match the traffic in the right lane?
should I have remained in the right lane with all the other eejits who had nothing to overtake?
or was what I did acceptable?
if I had moved back over later, would that be ok or would that be effectively undertaking on the left and therefore illegal?

Wexfordian

Technically and legally you are in the wrong. But its a wrong that is hard to resist. I have to admit its a bad habit of mine as well, which does have the possibility of the muppet (for lane hogging) in the overtaking lane moving into the left lane and causing an accident, which would then be my fault.

Mitch Connor

You will get people shaming your driving abilities and telling you how terrible you are - but imo - what you did is reasonable.

By law/rule you should have slowed down to the speed those right of you were doing and wated for an opportunity to overtake in the correct manner.

While I would always try to overtake in the correct manner, I would do what you did and not think another second about it.

Danbo!

Wexfordian wrote: »

Technically and legally you are in the wrong. But its a wrong that is hard to resist. I have to admit its a bad habit of mine as well, which does have the possibility of the muppet (for lane hogging) in the overtaking lane moving into the left lane and causing an accident, which would then be my fault.

Maybe maybe not. You can pass on the left if traffic on the right is "slow moving", although arguing that one you'd probably lose. There is also the fact that a driver changing lanes needs to give way to those already in the lane.

Personally, I hate undertaking. I don't trust most drivers, especially those that hog overtaking lanes so generally move behind them and flash until they move, but in the OPs situation it's frustrating as theres a whole line of people hogging and not just one.

Yes it's illegal, but ill only do it when I've a hard shoulder to bail into if the hogger decides to change suddenly without indicating or checking mirrors or blind spots.

smash

The speed limit is 120, you were doing 100 and you were in the correct lane. The lane hoggers in the outside lane really annoy me. It's not your fault you passed them by, you can't be expected to slow down because of them.... even if it's wrong.

MrDerp

Best to use your common sense in these situations, in my opinion, which you did.

The biggest danger here is that the type of people who drive slowly in the overtaking lane often intersect with the type of people that don't check their left blind spot.

To be honest, I 'undertake' myself from time to time. I just try to ensure that I don't do it anywhere near a junction (both for merging traffic, and the possibility the eejit will move across to make their exit), and I would build up my speed a bit to clear them as quickly as possible. I would also give them a minute to see that I'm behind them first, rather than plan to undertake on approach.

That said, I tend to be patient instead and tuck in when there's a group of cars already built up. I know the person in front is an idiot, and can keep half an eye on him/her, but I cannot identify the idiots in the line behind that might pop out in front to say "Hey, if anyone's passing them out first it's me" - you know the type, their overtaking procedure is: drive up the left lane until you're on top of the slower car, slow down to match their speed, then pull out in front of overtaking cars at 80km/h

IrishZeus

Mitch Connor wrote: »

You will get people shaming your driving abilities and telling you how terrible you are - but imo - what you did is reasonable.

By law/rule you should have slowed down to the speed those right of you were doing and wated for an opportunity to overtake in the correct manner.

While I would always try to overtake in the correct manner, I would do what you did and not think another second about it.

+1

Vertakill

This was done to death in a thread not so long ago.

It's not 'overtaking in the left'... this is undertaking.

There's only a few occasions where undertaking is legal and I think your one probably falls into a gray area (I'd undertake in your scenario if it were me).
You can undertake when there is heavy (or stopped?) traffic in the the normal/overtaking lane or when your exit is fast approaching.

corktina

well you were wrong but IMHO not as wrong as the guys hogging the overtaking lane (especially the guy at the head of the queue)

I think it would be a reasonable defence to say that you did not intentionally overtake on the left, but the sudden braking of that traffic forced the situation on you.

Now that the Traffic Corps don't have as much to do regarding speeding, why oh why arent they out there sorting this sort of thing? what do they actually do all day?

babo9

I don't think you were in the wrong.
From the Road Safety site

You may overtake on the left when

• You want to go straight ahead when the driver in front of you has moved out and signalled that they intend to turn right.
• You have signalled that you intend to turn left.
• 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.

You must not overtake when

• You are at or near a pelican crossing, zebra crossing or at pedestrian signals.
• A traffic sign or road marking prohibits it.
• You are approaching a junction.
• You are on the approach to a corner, bend, dip in the road, hump-back bridge, brow of a hill or on a narrow road.
• You are in the left-hand lane of a dual carriageway or motorway when traffic is moving at normal speed.

You were driving below the speed limit, as were the cars on your right, the normal speed for the fast lane I guess would be the speed limit, so you were correct to overtake them.

Marcusm

Vertakill wrote: »

This was done to death in a thread not so long ago.

It's not 'overtaking in the left'... this is undertaking.

There's only a few occasions where undertaking is legal and I think your one probably falls into a gray area (I'd undertake in your scenario if it were me).
You can undertake when there is heavy (or stopped?) traffic in the the normal/overtaking lane or when your exit is fast approaching.

Perhaps if you knew the ROTR as well as you assume, you'd know the official term.

You may overtake on the left when

• You want to go straight ahead when the driver in front of you has moved out and signalled that they intend to turn right.
• You have signalled that you intend to turn left.
• 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.

I think what bugs me the most is that I'm driving in the correct lane, because I'm not overtaking. I'm driving at 20km below the speed limit. Why should I have to break with nothing in front of me just because other people decide not to drive properly. So bottom line, I'm in the wrong!

Anyway, apologies if it was done to death already.

GreeBo

Vertakill wrote: »

It's not 'overtaking in the left'... this is undertaking.

Please show me this definition of undertaking related to motoring as from what I have seen it does not exist. You are overtaking on the left.

The OP is not in a grey area as they were not passing slowly moving traffic. The traffic was slower.

Brian?

Deleted User wrote: »

I think what bugs me the most is that I'm driving in the correct lane, because I'm not overtaking. I'm driving at 20km below the speed limit. Why should I have to break with nothing in front of me just because other people decide not to drive properly. So bottom line, I'm in the wrong!

Anyway, apologies if it was done to death already.

You weren't in the wrong. See 2 posts above you, the quote from the ROTR.

Nothing wrong with what you did at all. If the other 2 lanes were doing 120 and you flew down the indside at 140 you'd be in the wrong.

challengemaster

Does anyone actually think it's logical to move from lane 1 to lane 3, overtake cars going slower than they should be, then cut across 3 lanes to take an exit?

This law needs looking at tbh, as it's nothing short of stupidity in the above situation

sentient_6

smash wrote: »

The speed limit is 120, you were doing 100 and you were in the correct lane.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm driving at 20km below the speed limit.

The M50 is 120 now? (actual question, now being sarcastic, been awhile since i was on it)

Wexfordian

sentient_6 wrote: »

The M50 is 120 now?

One section still is isn't it?

GreeBo

challengemaster wrote: »

Does anyone actually think it's logical to move from lane 1 to lane 3, overtake cars going slower than they should be, then cut across 3 lanes to take an exit?

This law needs looking at tbh, as it's nothing short of stupidity in the above situation

If you are that close to your exit wouldnt you just wait the extra 10s?

Vertakill

Marcusm wrote: »

Perhaps if you knew the ROTR as well as you assume, you'd know the official term.

What part of my post are you referring to?
The rules you just quoted state the exact two things that I'm referring to.

I stated that in the OP's scenario, he had 2 reasons why he could 'undertake / overtake on the left' because his situation follows the below points...:

• You have signalled that you intend to turn left.
• 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.

So... what exactly are you talking about?
Just looks like you're trying to be argumentative.

challengemaster

GreeBo wrote: »

If you are that close to your exit wouldnt you just wait the extra 10s?

But why if I'm travelling already under the speed limit, should I have to slow down more because someone driving in the incorrect lane is driving slower than I am? It just makes no sense

sentient_6

sentient_6 wrote: »

The M50 is 120 now? (actual question, now being sarcastic, been awhile since i was on it)

the two lane section is still 120, it drops down to 100 after the exit I took ie. when it turns to three lanes.

Ush1

GreeBo wrote: »

Please show me this definition of undertaking related to motoring as from what I have seen it does not exist. You are overtaking on the left.

The OP is not in a grey area as they were not passing slowly moving traffic. The traffic was slower.

What I intimate from that is that it's okay to overtake on either side?

I personally go behind the person and wait for them to move left out of the way.

Cormic

Wexfordian wrote: »

One section still is isn't it?

Between junction 17 (M11 merge) and junction 13 (Sandyford) it is 120km/h

I sound like the girl from AA Roadwatch when I read that out

seamus

babo9 wrote: »

You were driving below the speed limit, as were the cars on your right, the normal speed for the fast lane I guess would be the speed limit, so you were correct to overtake them.

It's a grey area. The definition makes it OK when traffic in both lanes is "moving slowly". Nobody would define "moving slowly" as "moving below the speed limit". Additionally, there's no indication that the traffic in her lane was moving slowly - she didn't have to slow down.

This is and always has been a grey area that's been debated to death on this forum hundreds of times over the years and in reality we're no closer to a solid answer except to "use common sense".

I don't think anyone would have a problem with the OP's driving as described in her post. Slowing to match the other lane's speed would unnecessarily cause delays to traffic following her and may even constitute a hazard if following drivers are not expecting her to slow down.

IMO, the initial error has been made by the other drivers using the overtaking lane when not overtaking, so any legal errors by the OP are as a direct result of those errors. So her "error" is only secondary, their error is primary.

Anan1

GreeBo wrote: »

Please show me this definition of undertaking related to motoring as from what I have seen it does not exist. You are overtaking on the left.

'Undertaking' is overtaking on the left.

Vertakill

GreeBo wrote: »

Please show me this definition of undertaking related to motoring as from what I have seen it does not exist. You are overtaking on the left.

Nitpick much?
I know wikipedia isn't the final say in anything but..

GreeBo wrote: »

The OP is not in a grey area as they were not passing slowly moving traffic. The traffic was slower.

The reason I say grey area is that some people think that overtaking people on the left is only acceptable when the overtaking lane is bumper to bumper traffic (almost stopped).

Whereas I see 'slow traffic' as any collection of cars that's travelling considerably slower than the speed limit.
This is usually a cause for debate.

I very, very rarely overtake on the left but when I do, it's usually after sitting behind some pleb for miles and eventually losing my patience.

Ush1

seamus wrote: »

It's a grey area. The definition makes it OK when traffic in both lanes is "moving slowly". Nobody would define "moving slowly" as "moving below the speed limit". Additionally, there's no indication that the traffic in her lane was moving slowly - she didn't have to slow down.

This is and always has been a grey area that's been debated to death on this forum hundreds of times over the years and in reality we're no closer to a solid answer except to "use common sense".

I don't think anyone would have a problem with the OP's driving as described in her post. Slowing to match the other lane's speed would unnecessarily cause delays to traffic following her and may even constitute a hazard if following drivers are not expecting her to slow down.

IMO, the initial error has been made by the other drivers using the overtaking lane when not overtaking, so any legal errors by the OP are as a direct result of those errors. So her "error" is only secondary, their error is primary.

Agree with this. What is slow moving traffic is the question?

I just get behind them and maybe give them a flash if they really seem to have no intention of moving over.

corktina

im not bothering to check the dictionery but I beleive to OVERTAKE means to catch up and pass something and UNDERTAKE means to agree to do something (such as a burial)

So, overtake would be the correct term and undertake the possible outcome.

Mr. Presentable

babo9 wrote: »

I don't think you were in the wrong.
From the Road Safety site


You were driving below the speed limit, as were the cars on your right, the normal speed for the fast lane I guess would be the speed limit, so you were correct to overtake them.

Here's the thing.

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.

Slowly is subjective. In my opinion 100kmh is not slowly. OP was wrong, though as pointed out, not alone in being wrong. The correct thing would be to match the speed of the right lane and not undertake. The rule of thumb for the undertaker should be "If the car on my right changes lanes can I stop in time?"

Anan1

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

The correct thing would be to match the speed of the right lane and not undertake.

Legally you're right of course, but the result would be a rolling roadblock.

anndub

It's not "undertaking" unless you have moved in to that lane with the intention of passing the cars. There's nothing illegal about maintaining your speed in a lane once that speed is within the legal limit. It wouldn't make sense for you to slow down to match the speed of the morons in the middle lane, it would in fact be dangerous. In actual fact it is them breaking the law as they shouldn't be in an overtaking lane unless they are actually overtaking.

A lot of incorrect answers in this thread which probably goes towards explaining how bad people are in this country at motorway driving!

The OP is correct in that the speed limit on the m50 is 100kmph, not 120kmph.

Ush1

anndub wrote: »

It's not "undertaking" unless you have moved in to that lane with the intention of passing the cars. There's nothing illegal about maintaining your speed in a lane once that speed is within the legal limit. It wouldn't make sense for you to slow down to match the speed of the morons in the middle lane, it would in fact be dangerous. In actual fact it is them breaking the law as they shouldn't be in an overtaking lane unless they are actually overtaking.

A lot of incorrect answers in this thread which probably goes towards explaining how bad people are in this country at motorway driving!

The OP is correct in that the speed limit on the m50 is 100kmph, not 120kmph.

There is if you are suddenly flying past many cars to your right. This is the point of contention.

Anan1

anndub wrote: »

It's not "undertaking" unless you have moved in to that lane with the intention of passing the cars. There's nothing illegal about maintaining your speed in a lane once that speed is within the legal limit. It wouldn't make sense for you to slow down to match the speed of the morons in the middle lane, it would in fact be dangerous. In actual fact it is them breaking the law as they shouldn't be in an overtaking lane unless they are actually overtaking.

A lot of incorrect answers in this thread which probably goes towards explaining how bad people are in this country at motorway driving!

You're wrong. Undertaking has nothing to do with intention, it's the act of passing a car on the left.

Keith186

You done the right thing.

If you slowed down and matched the other drivers speed you effectively have a rolling barricade.

This would definitely frustrate other drivers behind you which I reckon could be more dangerous than what people call undertaking.

The law in this area is a joke and so is the education of dumb drivers who wreck the 'system' by hogging the overtaking lane. The amount of people who don't even know that hogging the overtaking lane is wrong is astounding.

Wexfordian

anndub wrote: »

It's not "undertaking" unless you have moved in to that lane with the intention of passing the cars.

This isn't anywhere in the RotR though. It may make sense, but you can't just add clauses.

anndub wrote: »

The OP is correct in that the speed limit on the m50 is 100kmph, not 120kmph.

Except where it isn't.

anndub wrote: »

A lot of incorrect answers in this thread which probably goes towards explaining how bad people are in this country at motorway driving!

Um.

Anan1

challengemaster wrote: »

But why if I'm travelling already under the speed limit, should I have to slow down more because someone driving in the incorrect lane is driving slower than I am? It just makes no sense

You shouldn't, because people shouldn't be senselessly blocking the overtaking (or centre) lane.;)

Draupnir

Wexfordian wrote: »

Except where it isn't.

There's nowhere on the M50 that's 120km/h anymore, there is of course that grey area where you aren't sure if you are on the M50 or the M11.

The M50, in fact motorways in general in this country, are a nightmare and the M50 is essentially an accident waiting to happen. It's virtually impossible to drive more than two exits without having drive badly to survive. You cannot make progress in the driving lane and you cannot overtake correctly because of the staggered cars in multiple lanes, driving at incorrect speeds and behaving in random fashion.

I drive it probably 8 times a week from the N4 to exit 13 and each journey is different, involving avoidance of strange driving behavior like drivers diving from the third lane to exit, drivers driving in the middle lane at 80 km/h while the driving lane is empty or people driving in packs in the middle and third lane side by side while the driving lane is empty.

The one that really worries me and can be genuinely scary, is when you are approaching a slow moving car in the driving lane at the speed limit and encounter a middle lane driver also moving slowly just as I attempt to overtake the car in the driving lane. I couldn't tell you how many times I've been "boxed in" by these double acts and had to brake quite heavily to avoid an accident. A lot of the time these middle lane drivers come from behind at 5 km/h faster than me, meaning that they haven't passed enough at the time of my maneouvre to make it safe or worse still, change lanes into the middle lane from the third lane and then sit there acting as a blocker.

The road is broken and I've said this before, it needs a dedicated Garda unit on each side to patrol it and "shepherd" cars into the driving lane until it becomes the norm and people can stop fearing for their lives.

fearcruach

Draupnir wrote: »

There's nowhere on the M50 that's 120km/h anymore

It's 120 km/h from J14 to the start of the M11

smash

Draupnir wrote: »

There's nowhere on the M50 that's 120km/h anymore, there is of course that grey area where you aren't sure if you are on the M50 or the M11.

Then there's the signs where it says "M50 - 120kph" From Bray to Sandyford, in both directions.

turbodiesel

Deleted User wrote: »

Just wondered what your thoughts are on this in general.

Driving this morning on the M50 between cherrywood and sandyford, heavy morning traffic, I entered the motorway and at next available opportunity, entered the overtaking lane to pass car in left lane, this was in and around the carrickmines exit. There are loads of cars in front of me in the overtaking lane, but none in the driving lane. I pulled back over as soon as I had finished overtaking. I never accelerated any more, I continued to drive at 100kmph but the cars in the right lane (10-12) all slowed, so I ended up passing them all out on the left, I never went back to the overtaking lane as my exit was next.

What should I have done here?
should I have slowed down to match the traffic in the right lane?
should I have remained in the right lane with all the other eejits who had nothing to overtake?
or was what I did acceptable?
if I had moved back over later, would that be ok or would that be effectively undertaking on the left and therefore illegal?

I recently passed my bikesafe assesment with the Gardai (http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=984)

I had failed it 18 months previous for undertaking on the N4 coming back in by palmerstown.

I was told by the guard that you have to just sit on the overtaking lane with your indicator on to let the person in front know that you want to overtake. You can sit there for any length of time and must make no other indications. no flashing headlights or using your horn or driving up close.....

Thats just what the law says.

What happens from a practical point isn't always that.....

Pataman

Its utterly scandalous that I can legally drive in the overtaking lane at 40kmh and effectively block the whole motorway, by noone being allowed undertake. Madness

seamus

Pataman wrote: »

Its utterly scandalous that I can legally drive in the overtaking lane at 40kmh and effectively block the whole motorway, by noone being allowed undertake. Madness

No you can't. You can only drive in the overtaking lane if you're overtaking.

If the vehicle you're overtaking is moving at 30km/h then it's technically legal, but you must leave the lane as soon as the overtake is complete, so the blockage is only for a short period of time.

E39MSport

Sweet Jebus - we need a new sub forum for all this stuff of late

jenizzle

I've had to drive the M50 every day for work recently, and I've started to take a deep breath on the on-ramp whilst I wait for madness to ensue. Sometimes I count how many exits I can drive in the driving lane doing the speedlimit but ignoring those to my right without having to overtake someone. It's more than it should be!

RustyNut

Draupnir wrote: »

The one that really worries me and can be genuinely scary, is when you are approaching a slow moving car in the driving lane at the speed limit and encounter a middle lane driver also moving slowly just as I attempt to overtake the car in the driving lane. I couldn't tell you how many times I've been "boxed in" by these double acts and had to brake quite heavily to avoid an accident.

How is it that you don't see the slow moving moving car in the middle lane before heavy breaking becomes necessary. If you are doing the limit and the car in the middle lane is slower then surely you should have seen it and planed ahead.
If this is something that is happening to you regularly I suggest you examine your own motorway driving skills.

turbodiesel

turbodiesel wrote: »

I was told by the guard that you have to just sit on the overtaking lane with your indicator on to let the person in front know that you want to overtake. You can sit there for any length of time and must make no other indications. no flashing headlights or using your horn or driving up close.....

See what's frustrating in this instance is that I didn't want to overtake anything, there was nothing in my lane for quite a distance. I was taking the next exit, and when I passed the last car in the driving lane, I pulled back in - as I always would!

Well done on passing your test btw!

Mods please merge this thread if you prefer, thanks

Pataman

This makes interesting reading!
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=57014340

Draupnir

RustyNut wrote: »

How is it that you don't see the slow moving moving car in the middle lane before heavy breaking becomes necessary. If you are doing the limit and the car in the middle lane is slower then surely you should have seen it and planed ahead.
If this is something that is happening to you regularly I suggest you examine your own motorway driving skills.

You see, that's the beauty of the M50, there is no accounting for the scenarios that can be encountered on the M50. The car in the middle could be in that lane originally allowing you to plan ahead, but of course they might be a car that drops out of the third lane and sits in the middle lane, or they might be one of these nuts who overtakes in the middle lane at 105 km/h and then sits in the middle lane at that speed for the craic.

The only way to avoid them becoming an obstruction to your own overtaking would be to block them, which I don't do, but even if you do I have found they will go to the third lane, overtake and then return to the middle lane in front of you.

I constantly examine all aspects of my driving, given that it's a huge responsibility and can be a life and death scenario for everyone involved I don't like to sit back and assume I am perfect.

Apologies for the confusion over my "M50 is never 120" comments, I was more making the point that it feels as though it would be better to just make it the M11 once the limit changes.

Al Capwned

'Undertaking'

Lord, that term annoys the bejesus out of me

GreeBo

challengemaster wrote: »

But why if I'm travelling already under the speed limit, should I have to slow down more because someone driving in the incorrect lane is driving slower than I am? It just makes no sense

Sure it annoying, but life is too short.

challengemaster

GreeBo wrote: »

Sure it annoying, but life is too short.

Exactly, so why make someone waste more of it because of some idiots who can't drive?