Your default lane for driving on M50 or other 3 lane road

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

More slowly and slower are the same thing.

If you're in the left lane and the cars to your right are moving slower than you, it's perfectly legal to over take on the left. It's not called under taking either, not such offense exists.

No ambiguity exists here. I honestly don't understand the confusion. The law is quite clear. You've applied some sort of qualification to "more slowly" which doesn't exist. It doesn't just apply in slow moving traffic or it would say so. Your interpretation is wrong, no interpretation is actually needed.

Actually, it does say in slow moving traffic.

The link posted earlier wasn't the rules of the road, it was a link to a driving school, which is even more disappointing. The rules of the road state:

You may overtake on the left when:

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.

It further states:

You must not overtake when

You are in the left-hand lane of a dual carriageway or motorway when traffic is moving at normal speed.

Kevin McCloud

I have a 150bhp tractor so i drive in the fast lane.

josip

Is there any point using the Rules of the Road as a reference?
Parts of them are worded vaguely, eg what's "normal speed" on a road?
The limit? 50% of the limit? 36% of the limit? When it's wet? When it's dark?
Try to navigate the Walkinstown/Glenageary roundabout using the Rules of the Road as your guide.

Pataman

Kilmac1 wrote: »

Driving length of country every two weeks and standard of driving on motorways is shocking compared to the mainland. I stick to lane two and three

I think the bold part of your statement goes to prove the first sentence.
Very bad from a professional driver

josip

josip wrote: »

Is there any point using the Rules of the Road as a reference?
Parts of them are worded vaguely, eg what's "normal speed" on a road?
The limit? 50% of the limit? 36% of the limit? When it's wet? When it's dark?
Try to navigate the Walkinstown/Glenageary roundabout using the Rules of the Road as your guide.

Glenageary Roundabout is as straightforward as they come.

The only road there was every ambiguity on was coming from DunLaoghaire to go up Sallyglen Road. Now they have that clearly marked out.

anncoates

Always in the overtaking lane, 3-4 feet behind the driver in front of me.

Unless my exit is 500 yards away, in which case I'll veer suddenly across the lanes before turning my indicator on for 2 seconds just as I complete the manoeuvre.

Mesrine65

2 wheels, I filter appropriately to make progress

EazyD

All I see from RSA ad's is speed kills, watch out for cyclists etc. Why don't they run a motorway ed campaign? Keep left at all times unless overtaking. Repeat it enough and start handing down fines and this irritating habit should be eradicated.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Actually, it does say in slow moving traffic.

The link posted earlier wasn't the rules of the road, it was a link to a driving school, which is even more disappointing. The rules of the road state:



It further states:

That's exactly my point. If you're not speeding and over take on the left you're not breaking the law.

Brian?

josip wrote: »

Is there any point using the Rules of the Road as a reference?
Parts of them are worded vaguely, eg what's "normal speed" on a road?
The limit? 50% of the limit? 36% of the limit? When it's wet? When it's dark?
Try to navigate the Walkinstown/Glenageary roundabout using the Rules of the Road as your guide.

Normal speed is the speed limit.

Brian?

eamonnq wrote: »

More slowly and slower are not the same thing. More slowly would mean that something is going slow and something else is going slower again (more slowly).

Whereas slower would just mean anything slower than than anything else, if someone is driving at 200mph in the middle lane and someone in the left lane is driving at 240mph, the middle lane is moving slower, but not slowly, nor more slowly.

If you're breaking the speed limit, that's illegal. So that's clearly breaking the law.

More slowly and slower are the same thing.

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

That's exactly my point. If you're not speeding and over take on the left you're not breaking the law.

Um, it says if you are driving at normal speed you cannot overtake on the left.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Um, it says if you are driving at normal speed you cannot overtake on the left.

No, it says when traffic is moving at normal speed I.e. The speed limit. If the traffic on the right is moving below the speed limit, overtake away.

Chips Lovell

I wouldn't rely on the ROTR as the arbiter of what's strictly legal and what isn't. In several instances it misinterprets/misrepresents the law. You're always better looking at the legislation itself.

Chips Lovell

The most recent legislation on the matter states:

(5)(a) A driver (other than a pedal cyclist) may only overtake on the left—

(i) where the driver of the vehicle about to be overtaken has signalled an intention to turn to the right and the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to go straight ahead or turn to the left,

(ii) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to turn to the left at the next road junction and has signalled this intention, or

(iii) in slow-moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle,

MarkAnthony

Brian? wrote: »

That's exactly my point. If you're not speeding and over take on the left you're not breaking the law.

EH? How do you work that one out?

You don't undertake on the motorway despite the muppetry that goes on. Undertaking is simply adding to the issue. The rule is designed for slow moving traffic not going down the left hand-side of someone at 119Kph.

Chips Lovell

The law defines slow moving traffic as "when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle".

If someone's doing 80 in the centre lane and you pass them doing 100 in the left lane, you haven't broken the law.

whomitconcerns

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The law defines slow moving traffic as "when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle".

If someone's doing 80 in the centre lane and you pass them doing 100 in the left lane, you haven't broken the law.

Good luck with that one in court....

AndyBoBandy

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The most recent legislation on the matter states:

Would that argument stand up in court though? If I did do this, and was stopped by a Guard for it, could I go to court quoting this rule saying the outside traffic was slower moving? and as long as I didn't break the speed limit, I was entitled to do it!

It'd be interesting to see how a judge would interpret that law/rule.

Chips Lovell

Assuming a Guard would actually stop you for that and attempt to prosecute, then yeah, I'd be expecting my solicitor to point this out in court.

AndyBoBandy

Exactly, it simply states 'slower moving' it doesn't say that any speed over 40-50-60 km/h and the rule does not apply.

awec

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The law defines slow moving traffic as "when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle".

If someone's doing 80 in the centre lane and you pass them doing 100 in the left lane, you haven't broken the law.

You would lose your argument here with 100% certainty if you were to challenge it.

80km/h is not slow moving traffic. The law is designed so that people in the left lane don't have to artificially keep their speed down in times of high traffic, when the lane to the right may not be moving fast due to congestion. We have all driven in congested traffic where you move at 30 or 40 km/h and for a few mins the left lane moves faster, then the right lane, then the left lane etc.

If there is one car trundling at 80km/h in the middle lane and no cars in the left and you fly up their inside at 100km/h you absolutely 100% have undertaken and broken the law. Overtake on the right, it's not difficult.

whomitconcerns

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Assuming a Guard would actually stop you for that and attempt to prosecute, then yeah, I'd be expecting my solicitor to point this out in court.

I am trying to remember that there was a court case recently where someone claimed this and the judge told them to "get up the yard"...

awec

Andybobandy wrote: »

It'd be interesting to see how a judge would interpret that law/rule.

He would most likely laugh at you and tell you to go away.

Chips Lovell

awec wrote: »

80km/h is not slow moving traffic.

Sorry, you're incorrect on this. The legislation clearly states what is slow moving traffic.

whomitconcerns wrote: »

I am trying to remember that there was a court case recently where someone claimed this and the judge told them to "get up the yard"...

Judges aren't infallible.

awec

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Sorry, you're incorrect on this. The legislation clearly states what is slow moving traffic.



Judges aren't infallible.

Does it? Can you quote the legislation that defines 80km/h as slow moving?

MarkAnthony

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The law defines slow moving traffic as "when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle".

If someone's doing 80 in the centre lane and you pass them doing 100 in the left lane, you haven't broken the law.

What is your basis for that interpretation? I assume it's a literal one?

I Judge is going to take a purposive approach; the purpose being to aid safety for people driving at high speed. To be fair a DC judge is just gonna do what he feels like but euros to beans in a CC appeal a purposive approach will be taken.

Francie Barrett

I love the way that 63% of people say they use the left lane when the reality is that the true figure is more like 10-20%.

Chips Lovell

awec wrote: »

Does it? Can you quote the legislation that defines 80km/h as slow moving?

There is no legislation that defines any speed as "slow moving".

awec

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

There is no legislation that defines any speed as "slow moving".

So how exactly does the legislation clearly define 80km/h as slow moving as you claimed only a few posts ago?