Driving in the middle lane

If Im wrong then so be it, and if there have been prosecutions where someone in a solid lane of traffic has been done for undertaking another solid lane of traffic then Id be interested to see it. I just dont see how it would have ever happened.

Just to clarify again, I am not talking about a single car undertaking another single car.

Hmm, putting aside the 'slow' versus 'fast' argument, I don't see much in your favour if you struck someone merging back to lane one (For example). If I look in my left mirror and I see a car, I'm not expecting them to be going hard enough to catch me or worse still moving fast through a blind spot i.e. Any traffic that is going faster than me, by convention and by the law, should be passing me to my right. You cannot reasonably expect someone to be passing you on the left. Not that it gives you a free reign to jump left but in terms of 'responsibility' you have a responsibility to another driver to pass on the right except for the given circumstances. Its like at a roundabout, its reasonable to expect that traffic will always come from your right only.

Of course, those will say, 'Well they should be more observant' and I am, I'm just posing the Joe Soap scenario. I think you'd be levelled if you ended up in front of judge and it was proved you were undertaking when you hit someone. I wouldn't want to be the undertaking car, I'd expect zero mercy.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

The thing that bugs me more than middle lane cowboys, is the blind eye our coppers turn to it.

Seen plenty of Garda do it also.

I was watching on episode of Road Wars (or something similar) a few years ago. The police car came across a car behind another car in the overtaking lane. Both were doing about 90 mph. The car behind was not tailgating but it was obvious that he wanted to pass as the driving lane was clear. What happened next surprised me; the police flashed the car in front (the one behind), it pulled over to the driving lane. They then proceeded to flash and then pull over the driver ahead. He was done for driving in the incorrect lane and causing an obstruction. The other driver was let go and was not pulled over at all. The police reckoned that although the speed limit was 70 mph, the conditions were not dangerous to travel at 90 mph and that even with them both driving at 90 mph, there was no immediate danger to any road users and that the guy hogging the overtaking lane was the one causing the greater offence.

ironclaw wrote: »

Hmm, putting aside the 'slow' versus 'fast' argument, I don't see much in your favour if you struck someone merging back to lane one (For example). If I look in my left mirror and I see a car, I'm not expecting them to be going hard enough to catch me or worse still moving fast through a blind spot i.e. Any traffic that is going faster than me, by convention and by the law, should be passing me to my right. You cannot reasonably expect someone to be passing you on the left. Not that it gives you a free reign to jump left but in terms of 'responsibility' you have a responsibility to another driver to pass on the right except for the given circumstances. Its like at a roundabout, its reasonable to expect that traffic will always come from your right only.

Of course, those will say, 'Well they should be more observant' and I am, I'm just posing the Joe Soap scenario. I think you'd be levelled if you ended up in front of judge and it was proved you were undertaking when you hit someone. I wouldn't want to be the undertaking car, I'd expect zero mercy.

Course the last thing you'd expect of a middle lane hogger is for them to use a bloody indicator and mirrors. So therefore no way could fault be apportioned on them if they drove into another car - even the use of the text above - the left lane user hits the middle lane user even though its the middle lane user which crssses the lane - says it all really. It seems middle lane hoggers are treated in a similar fashion to 'slow chidren' were in the past. Ah sure that's the way they are so lets just drive around them.

As said by a number of contributors until I'm stopped for doing so I will continue to undertake traffic that is deliberately breaking the law by hogging middle/3rd lane rather than create havoc by careering across a busy motorway in order to be able to claim I'm perfect and alway obey the rules to the letter of the law rather than use common sense in a given situation.

ironclaw wrote: »

Of course, but in your daily driving, are you reasonably expecting someone to be attempting to pass you, at a greater speed, on a motorway, on your left? No. Your not. Its convention to pass on the right. Granted we should all be observant, thats a given, but if presented with both cases I don't feel it would go in your favour. I'm not arguing who should have looked where and when. The fact is, if you pass on the left, your doing something that is not expected of a driver in Ireland.

Why did you pass Mr.'A' on the left side?

Because lane 2 or 3 was 'busy'

The greater of the two evils would be passing on the left. Granted Mr.'A' might get a slap for incorrect lane procedure but I would imagine a good deal of the blame will be handed to you because you conducted a manoeuvre outside what a reasonable person would do and should have done.

In every day driving I dont expect anything; I observe what is happening around me and drive accordingly. If I want to move into the left hand lane I will check what is coming up behind me, and if there is a car in the left hand lane that is travelling faster than I am I will wait until they have passed or until it safe to make my move. Anyone who doesnt do the same should not be behind the wheel of a car.

Just like when a traffic light turns green I dont just expect that its clear to go; I check first that nobody is running a red light (as they often do). Expectations/assumptions when driving is a quick way to get yourself killed.

The greater of two evils is not passing on the left; like I said, it would not be dangerous to pass on the left if people were able to observe properly, however improper observation is always going to be massively dangerous when driving. The person who changes lanes without observing if it is safe to do so is a menace on the road.

I'm fully with celticbest on this one. I drive the M50 most mornings, starting at Swords and exiting at the N3, N4, N7 or Ballymount or Tallaght or joining the M11 depending where in the country I'm working. I get into the left-most lane approaching the M1/M50 interchange and stay there to avoid all the bellends who boot down the outside then force their way into the right lane at the last minute. I continue into the left lane on the M50 and drive along at the same speed as everyone else in the lane. Meanwhile the Beemers and Audis that cut into the M50 lanes at the last minute are breaking the solid white line round the corner to make sure they get into the "fast" lane before anyone thinks they're poor or unimportant. At this point I usually take note of one of the cars (usually something like a gold 09 MH A6 or 520d) and use it as a marker. By the time I get to the N7 or wherever, If I can spot my original marker car, I reckon 80% of the time they are a long way behind me, despite their initial gains made between the Airport and Finglas.

I don't set out to "undertake" but I do drive calmly in the left hand lane and do find myself ahead of many cars that joined the M50 at the same point as me and don't see the problem. I refuse to drive at 60-70 kph just because lanes 2 and 3 are doing that speed and conventional overtaking on the right is not possible. The only way around this is to educate the drivers of Ireland but I would put big money on Gaybo and his RSA mates being middle lane drivers themselves and even if they weren't, rules and correct driving is just not important to the vast majority of Irish drivers.

ironclaw wrote: »

With respect djimi, I feel your just trying to justify undertaking. For example, with that attitude, don't ever go ski-ing. You have a responsibility to those down slope of you as you have the greater field of vision. Just like here, if you past on the left, you have the greater field of vision than a driver you are approaching from the rear and most likely in their blind spot. You are wilfully putting that person and yourself in danger. Its far easier for you to see the danger and they should reasonably assume that any decent driver is not going to do something as idiotic. Sitting or passing someone's blind spot on the wrong side is idiotic. Oppose this to passing on the right where a driver will expect you to be and the problem is completely removed.

I don't drive assuming no one will be on my left. I kinda pride myself on being observant, knowing each and every car I pass and that is ahead of me. But I consider it extremely poor driving to conduct a manoeuvre that a normal driver will not be expecting i.e. In traffic, I don't expect there to suddenly be a car barreling up my left hand side.

I'm saying this all in an Irish and UK context as its convention to pass on the right. Goes right out the window in some European countries and the US.

Again with the assumptions and expectations. A good driver does not expect anything. A bad driver is just as likely to cause an accident changing lanes to the right than they are to the left (I couldnt tell you how many times I have nearly been wiped out when overtaking a car because the driver didnt bother to look right before pulling into the overtaking lane); by this logic should we never overtake at all?

Im not condoning undertaking at all; Im simply saying that where an incident occurs due to undertaking it is the driver who changed lanes without looking that is far more at fault than the driver who was in the left hand lane. I dont care what any other car on the road is doing; observation is the single most important element of driving.

Wow, what a lofty equine.


I know that technically passing on the left in normal circumstances is wrong and I'm very aware of the law. I'm also aware of what I'm doing as well as other all other road users when driving but what I've described is the reality of driving on the M50 daily.

djimi wrote: »

Again with the assumptions and expectations. A good driver does not expect anything.

To quote Dunlop Tyres from the 90s I think, 'Expect the unexpected' and I agree with all your observation points djimi . But when I drive, there are certain things I assume i.e. At a roundabout, traffic is going to come from my right only. At traffic light, I assume if they are green that there is a low probability that someone is going to cut through a red into my path. Thats not saying I barrel through with no regard, yes I exercise extreme caution and observation. However, the driver doing the 'unexpected' is more than likely committing an illegal(And if not, stupid unconventional) act. I do not expect someone trying to make up a few seconds to cut up on my left. And thats what we're talking here, seconds. Your not going to save even 5 minutes by driving like Mad Max down the M50. Average speed saves times over exceptional distances.

And all this is coming from someone (myself) who has hours of DVR footage of anything from 3pm to 5am on the M50, going 1 to 3 and back to 1. Because its correct driving. We all give out about 'middle lane' hoggers but yet very few are prepared to drive properly. My hope is someone will see me going from 1 to 3 to 1 on an empty road and start a conversation with someone, who will hopefully say that being in the middle lane is wrong to that hogger. And someone is educated. I live in hope :pac:

But the longer people drive as they like and cut up the left, the longer this behaviour will continue because what good are lanes if the people who know how to use them don't. Basically by undertaking your misusing lanes, the very same as a middle lane hogger.

ironclaw wrote: »

At a roundabout, traffic is going to come from my right only. At traffic light, I assume if they are green that there is a low probability that someone is going to cut through a red into my path.

You obviously don't drive in Galway! :pac:

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Until the day you are pulled over and fined.

Yes, posters right here on this forum have been done for overtaking on the left.

As a matter of interest what was the sanction in these cases? In the second link it would seem to me that the Gardai were looking for any excuse to book the guy which might suggest they were not too anxious to book him only on the undertaking charge. Maybe its because they though they would look pretty stupid going to court and explaining were were hogging the right hand lane while not overtaking and the criminal had the audacity to undertake us so he could go about his normal business. They'd have been right.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Well, no, they wouldn't. Say it's you in court. The charge would be read out, and you'd be asked guilty or not guilty.

How exactly do you propose to defend yourself?

Question still stands what charges were brought in the linked cases? While I don't agree with the interpretation of the rule I would obviously be interested in reading about the sanctions previously applied by the Courts in these kind of cases.

At least then I would know definitively what the actual precedent is in these cases rather than trying to decide what interpretation of the current rule being debated on here is more correct. Having said that I know definitively that its ilegal to exceed 120kph on motorways .. do I exceed 120kph on motorways on occassion?

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Well, no, they wouldn't. Say it's you in court. The charge would be read out, and you'd be asked guilty or not guilty.

How exactly do you propose to defend yourself?

If it was me (and assuming I was stupid enough to defend myself instead of getting a solicitor), I'd say not guilty on the basis that I had joined the motorway at junction Y, and was driving in the driving lane for x kilometers at a steady, maintained speed, and had not been overtaken by the other car. I was not deliberately performing an overtaking maneuver. The car in the overtaking lane was driving slowly, and not overtaking, and not signalling any intention of returning to the driving lane. It would have been wreckless of me to brake to match his speed, fall in behind him, overtake, then move back across 2 lanes of traffic to the driving lane, as he was obviously distracted, and I didn't want to distract him further by weaving backwards and forwards across the road behind and in front of him.

I'd probably still get the book thrown at me, but that would be what I'd say.


What would the charge in court be anyway?