Lane hogger 0 Garda 1

okane1

Driving along the N7 coming into Dublin last night which has three lanes.

I was behind a Garda motorbike in lane 1. Approached a truck in lane 1, both of us indicated into lane 2 to overtake. Passed the truck and saw a car in lane 3. No one else on the in either lane 1 or 2. We were moving faster than this lane hogger so we both moved into lane 3, to prevent undertaking it.

We were behind this lane hogger for 10secs. Remember no other vehicle in lane 1 or 2. After 10sec the Garda motorbike put on his lights and pulled the car over.

I was so happy seeing this and hopefully will see more of it going forward!

Sully

Wish it would happen more often!

mrsoundie

OMG a Guard doing their jobs!

hi5

If the lane hogger was in lane 2 instead of three, would the garda have pulled him over or just overtaken him in lane three and continued on his merry way.
They need to start pulling over the guys in lane two aswell.

mattser

Sure they'll probably do that " going forward " as well.

P.C.

okane1 wrote: »

I was so happy seeing this and hopefully will see more of it going forward!

Well, you will not see it if they are going backwards.

Ronan H

okane1 wrote: »

I was behind a Garda motorbike in lane 1. Approached a truck in lane 1, both of us indicated into lane 2 to overtake. Passed the truck and saw a car in lane 3. No one else on the in either lane 1 or 2. We were moving faster than this lane hogger so we both moved into lane 3, to prevent undertaking it.

But doesnt the Rules Of The Road say that you can undertake if the traffic in L3 is moving slower than you?

"Overtake only on the right, unless traffic is travelling in slow moving queues and the traffic queue on your right is travelling more slowly than you are. If you intend to move from a slower lane to a faster lane, adjust your speed first."

Granted in your case it wasnt a slow moving "queue" as such, but a queue was building was it not?!

Edit: I dont think I would have the balls to do it if there was a Garda in front of me, but that's my understanding of the rule anyway and I certainly have undertook people in the past based on this understanding...

kaizersoze

okane1 wrote: »

Driving along the N7 coming into Dublin last night which has three lanes.

I was behind a Garda motorbike in lane 1. Approached a truck in lane 1, both of us indicated into lane 2 to overtake. Passed the truck and saw a car in lane 3. No one else on the in either lane 1 or 2. We were moving faster than this lane hogger so we both moved into lane 3, to prevent undertaking it.

We were behind this lane hogger for 10secs. Remember no other vehicle in lane 1 or 2. After 10sec the Garda motorbike put on his lights and pulled the car over.

I was so happy seeing this and hopefully will see more of it going forward!

Nice story and very well told.

corktina

Ronan H wrote: »

But doesnt the Rules Of The Road say that you can undertake if the traffic in L3 is moving slower than you?

"Overtake only on the right, unless traffic is travelling in slow moving queues and the traffic queue on your right is travelling more slowly than you are. If you intend to move from a slower lane to a faster lane, adjust your speed first."

Granted in your case it wasnt a slow moving "queue" as such, but a queue was building was it not?!

Edit: I dont think I would have the balls to do it if there was a Garda in front of me, but that's my understanding of the rule anyway and I certainly have undertook people in the past based on this understanding...

"slow moving queues"

Ronan H

corktina wrote: »

"slow moving queues"

Fair enough, but it's the effect on traffic that is the issue is it not?

At the head of all slow moving queues in lane 3 you will usually find one slow car causing the issue, so whether its just that car by itself, or that car followed by thirty seven other cars, the effect is an impediment to the traffic flowing freely and safely.

My understanding is that most traffic rules are designed to keep traffic flowing freely and safely. Scenario time...

If there's one car going slow in lane 3, with no cars in lane 2, and I'm supposed to move in behind the one slow car in lane 3 (because it's not a slow moving queue), then that doesn't fit in with the idea of traffic moving freely. In essence that is slowing the traffic down, and forming a queue.

However, if there is already thirty eight cars in the queue in lane 3, and lane 2 is free, I can then undertake the "slow moving queue"? That to me doesnt fit in with the safety aspect of the ROTR. To my mind, it's safer to undertake a slow moving single car in lane 3 rather than undertake a slow moving queue of thirty eight cars in lane 3.

A moot point I guess.

Bigcheeze

Thread would be so much better if OP had a dash cam.

goz83

My understanding of the undertaking rule is that you are not breaking the law if both lanes are moving slowly "in traffic queue". Imagine the chaos if it was illegal to undertake in such circumstances. In the OP, it would have been illegal to undertake, even if the car in lane 3 was only doing 30kph. The OP did right and on this occasion was rewarded by the fact that the lane hogger was pulled over.

Ronan H

goz83 wrote: »

In the OP, it would have been illegal to undertake, even if the car in lane 3 was only doing 30kph. The OP did right and on this occasion was rewarded by the fact that the lane hogger was pulled over.

Maybe the OP was legally correct, but it doesn't make any sense if you ask me, and of course one won't always have a Garda on hand to solve the problem. On another day, with the Garda replaced by an impatient driver in a hurry to get to a meeting the OP's opening post might have been titled "Road rage pile up on M50"...

mgbgt1978

Good job the Bike cop was there....otherwise the OP could be still stuck travelling on the N7 behind the Crawler.
BTW I like the spanish practise where drivers come up behind you in the ouside lane and if you don't move over fairly quickly they will turn on their indicator and leave it on to attract your "attention"....probably would'nt work here as that would mean the Lane-hogger having to actually look in their mirror.

Keith186

OP only told half of story! I would've pulled over too to hear the bollocking dumb driver got and hopefully a fine too.

Henry Ford III

Ronan H wrote: »

Fair enough, but it's the effect on traffic that is the issue is it not?

At the head of all slow moving queues in lane 3 you will usually find one slow car causing the issue, so whether its just that car by itself, or that car followed by thirty seven other cars, the effect is an impediment to the traffic flowing freely and safely.

My understanding is that most traffic rules are designed to keep traffic flowing freely and safely. Scenario time...

If there's one car going slow in lane 3, with no cars in lane 2, and I'm supposed to move in behind the one slow car in lane 3 (because it's not a slow moving queue), then that doesn't fit in with the idea of traffic moving freely. In essence that is slowing the traffic down, and forming a queue.

However, if there is already thirty eight cars in the queue in lane 3, and lane 2 is free, I can then undertake the "slow moving queue"? That to me doesnt fit in with the safety aspect of the ROTR. To my mind, it's safer to undertake a slow moving single car in lane 3 rather than undertake a slow moving queue of thirty eight cars in lane 3.

A moot point I guess.

No you can't. "Slow moving" doesn't mean "slower moving".

It's a pain to obey the rules at times, particularly when someone elses ignorance inconveniences you, but passing on the left in the circumstances you've described will get you in trouble if you're detected doing so.

okane1

Bigcheeze wrote: »

Thread would be so much better if OP had a dash cam.

Funny enough I have a dash cam but didnt have it on, I know, stupid of me. Would have made for a great show.

okane1

Keith186 wrote: »

OP only told half of story! I would've pulled over too to hear the bollocking dumb driver got and hopefully a fine too.

I was planning on beeping at the Garda and give him the thumbs up. Second thought, I thought that might be a bad idea!

corktina

the reason why you shouldn't undertake is that it isn't safe to do so..theres no gurantee the guy in front wont change lanes without looking just in case someone is illegally undertaking him, (and if you hit him, it will be your fault of course...)

Voodoomelon

corktina wrote: »

it will be your fault of course...)

On the contrary, how would the other driver prove that you were undertaking, and not just remaining level (assuming the collision took place when you were level bonnet wise)? He entered your lane and is the cause of the accident.

dr.fuzzenstein

Ronan H wrote: »

But doesnt the Rules Of The Road say that you can undertake if the traffic in L3 is moving slower than you?

"Overtake only on the right, unless traffic is travelling in slow moving queues and the traffic queue on your right is travelling more slowly than you are. If you intend to move from a slower lane to a faster lane, adjust your speed first."

Granted in your case it wasnt a slow moving "queue" as such, but a queue was building was it not?!

Edit: I dont think I would have the balls to do it if there was a Garda in front of me, but that's my understanding of the rule anyway and I certainly have undertook people in the past based on this understanding...

Let's get one thing absolutely clear here:
This law means that if the motorway is completely snarled up with traffic to the point where it comes to a complete standstill, it is now not illegal to be in the left hand lane when it moves and the right hand lane doesn't or moves at a slower pace.This law is NOT, and I repeat NOT an excuse to pass any vehicle on the inside unless there's two slow moving collums of traffic and you have no choice otherwise.
ANYONE using this lame excuse in front of a judge will hear "guilty, next!"
Sometimes there are arseholes, cretins, lunatics, mental patients or people with other complicated and unpronounceable problems who block the outside lane and you will be forced to pass them on the inside, because they WILL NOT move over for anything in the world. I know, I've done it myself.
But if you do this, know this:
If you're caught and trying to use the "slow moving traffic" defence, you're gonna have a bad time!

edit:

And of course a hooray for a Gard doing his job! He/She must have been new and still full of enthusiasm, give him/her a few years, he/she will only be interested in his breakfast roll, overtime and pension.

areyawell

Sure what will happen the person that got pulled over? Nothing?

i57dwun4yb1pt8

why didnt you pull back into lane 1 instead of heading into lane 3 ?

Mint Sauce

DaDumTish wrote: »

why didnt you pull back into lane 1 instead of heading into lane 3 ?

I'd say on account of the lane hogger, the Guard, and the risk of him being done for undertaking.

:rolleyes:

corktina

Voodoomelon wrote: »

On the contrary, how would the other driver prove that you were undertaking, and not just remaining level (assuming the collision took place when you were level bonnet wise)? He entered your lane and is the cause of the accident.

because if you were level or more than level with him, he would see you, and not change lane. In all over circumstances you'd hit him from behind.

that you MAY be able to wriggle out of it, wouldn't change the fact you were to blame...

Ronan H

Henry Ford III wrote: »

No you can't. "Slow moving" doesn't mean "slower moving".

It's a pain to obey the rules at times, particularly when someone elses ignorance inconveniences you, but passing on the left in the circumstances you've described will get you in trouble if you're detected doing so.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Let's get one thing absolutely clear here:
This law means that if the motorway is completely snarled up with traffic to the point where it comes to a complete standstill, it is now not illegal to be in the left hand lane when it moves and the right hand lane doesn't or moves at a slower pace.This law is NOT, and I repeat NOT an excuse to pass any vehicle on the inside unless there's two slow moving collums of traffic and you have no choice otherwise.
ANYONE using this lame excuse in front of a judge will hear "guilty, next!"
Sometimes there are arseholes, cretins, lunatics, mental patients or people with other complicated and unpronounceable problems who block the outside lane and you will be forced to pass them on the inside, because they WILL NOT move over for anything in the world. I know, I've done it myself.
But if you do this, know this:
If you're caught and trying to use the "slow moving traffic" defence, you're gonna have a bad time!

edit:

And of course a hooray for a Gard doing his job! He/She must have been new and still full of enthusiasm, give him/her a few years, he/she will only be interested in his breakfast roll, overtime and pension.

Guys when I said "slow" moving traffic, I was referring to "slower" moving traffic, just to clear that up.

Silvera

A few months ago I saw an ambulance drive all the way from Naas to Newlands Cross in lane 3 - no blue lights on and the driver was sticking rigidly to the speed limit. It was a quiet evening traffic wise and lanes 1 and 2 were mostly free of traffic. (Both driver and paramedic were in front seats so no patient onboard). Very un-professional driving imho.

Mc Love

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Good job the Bike cop was there....otherwise the OP could be still stuck travelling on the N7 behind the Crawler.
BTW I like the spanish practise where drivers come up behind you in the ouside lane and if you don't move over fairly quickly they will turn on their indicator and leave it on to attract your "attention"....probably would'nt work here as that would mean the Lane-hogger having to actually look in their mirror.

That does work here too - i have tried it on numerous occasions, and its has been successful 99.9% of the time

Mar4ix

I think by the rules , outside city on motorway driver cant occupy lane 3, while first and second lane still free .... same rule apply for two line motorway. I was doing exam nearly 16 years ago, but such thing still in my mind.

Cant remember driving "in city" rule, i think that doesnt apply , but not sure though.,. who has a book, could have look .

Gary ITR

You had me until you said 'going forward', that's right up there with 'low hanging fruit' when it comes to sales meeting bull****

mfceiling

Surely on a 3 lane road, the minute you move into lane 2 or 3 you should have your indicator on constantly as you are overtaking.

Indicator should be cancelled when you return to lane 1 - that is the correct driving lane.

keith16

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

edit:

And of course a hooray for a Gard doing his job! He/She must have been new and still full of enthusiasm, give him/her a few years, he/she will only be interested in his breakfast roll, overtime and pension.

Guards can't win can they? Don't do their job and it's all "where's a guard when you need them?"

If they actually do their job it's all "don't worry, he /she will soon be consumed by breakfast rolls and pension". And so what if they are interested in overtime? They still have to put in the hours. Incredibly ignorant of you to highlight as some sort of fcuking freebie that just lands in their lap.

Pity, your post was actually respectable up until that point.

colm_mcm

mfceiling wrote: »

Surely on a 3 lane road, the minute you move into lane 2 or 3 you should have your indicator on constantly as you are overtaking.

Indicator should be cancelled when you return to lane 1 - that is the correct driving lane.

Absolutely miles off. Do you do this?

wonski

mfceiling wrote: »

Surely on a 3 lane road, the minute you move into lane 2 or 3 you should have your indicator on constantly as you are overtaking.

Indicator should be cancelled when you return to lane 1 - that is the correct driving lane.

Surely not. You indicate before changing lane. If you leave your indicator on driving on 2nd lane, you will cause some confusion to the drivers in outer(3rd)lane.

Our man in Havana

Pottler

mrsoundie wrote: »

OMG a Guard doing their jobs!

Whose jobs?

Pj!

Our man in Havana wrote: »

[video]

Haha. That was brilliant.

0:25 - 0:35 is very enjoyable.

paddydriver

Can see the headline now "slow moving lane 3 driver panics when the blues went on, slammed on the brakes, AGS then into the rear of him.. and OP then drives over the Garda...:eek:"

Topper Harley

Our man in Havana wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5dL4DPm-DE&feature=share

The driver of the car with the dash cam could do with some anger management therapy. :P But I understand how he feels all the same.

Thing is, the cop in that video probably wouldn't have pulled the lane hogger over if he hadn't started acting the prick.

And no doubt, even after a bollocking, the lane hogger probably still thinks he was in the right.

Kenny Logins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE82FZpq0qM

Skip to 1m08s - http://youtu.be/JE82FZpq0qM?t=1m08s

Pj!

mfceiling wrote: »

Surely on a 3 lane road, the minute you move into lane 2 or 3 you should have your indicator on constantly as you are overtaking.

Indicator should be cancelled when you return to lane 1 - that is the correct driving lane.

:eek:

mfceiling

wonski wrote: »

Surely not. You indicate before changing lane. If you leave your indicator on driving on 2nd lane, you will cause some confusion to the drivers in outer(3rd)lane.

Sorry.......badly put.

Should you not indicate constantly in lane 3 though? If you are overtaking would it not need to be kept on throughout the procedure? Or do you only indicate when you are starting the manuoeuvre and then again when pulling in?

I don't do it as i normally drive in lane one except when overtaking trucks/slow moving vehicles....very rarely do i ever be in lane 3 tbh.

colm_mcm

Only indicate before and during lane changing

wonski

mfceiling wrote: »

Sorry.......badly put.

Should you not indicate constantly in lane 3 though?

No, no need. You may be in lane 3 for longer in heavy traffic, what is the point of having it on?

MagicSean

Silvera wrote: »

A few months ago I saw an ambulance drive all the way from Naas to Newlands Cross in lane 3 - no blue lights on and the driver was sticking rigidly to the speed limit. It was a quiet evening traffic wise and lanes 1 and 2 were mostly free of traffic. (Both driver and paramedic were in front seats so no patient onboard). Very un-professional driving imho.

What was the status of the patient in the back?

mfceiling

wonski wrote: »

No, no need. You may be in lane 3 for longer in heavy traffic, what is the point of having it on?

But what about in quiet traffic or as the OP was posting about - lane hoggers.

I've put my indicator on when sitting behind slow moving vehicles in the overtaking lane (sometimes works - most times doesn't).

corktina

MagicSean wrote: »

What was the status of the patient in the back?

absent?

MagicSean

corktina wrote: »

absent?

You were using your xray vision? I always find it amusing when people assume no blue lights means an ambulance is just going for a drive.

corktina

MagicSean wrote: »

You were using your xray vision? I always find it amusing when people assume no blue lights means an ambulance is just going for a drive.

if the crew are both in the front, then it's empty.

MagicSean

corktina wrote: »

if the crew are both in the front, then it's empty.

Or they are on their way to a call or they have a third person on the back.

michael999999

The penalty points were probably wiped before the guard got back to the station!