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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Undertaking

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    blondeonblonde
    Registered Users Posts: 372 ✭✭blondeonblonde


    vrusinov wrote: »
    Sure, but a very few of them are on N7 Sunday 7am.
    So you drive in the middle lane at 7am on a Sunday morning when there is no traffic and the left lane is free? That is even more ridiculous.

    Why not just drive in the appropriate lane? its not as if entering traffic, trucks etc will be forcing u out of your lane often at that time. I can understand your logic on somewhere like the M50 where at certain intersections, a large volume of traffic will be merging and you need to move out to facilitate that but when traffic is light it makes no sense.


  • Options
    #33
    overshoot
    Registered Users Posts: 3,202 ✭✭✭overshoot


    dil999 wrote: »
    Nonsense.
    There is nothing in the rules of the road that says you must reduce your speed to that of vehicles to your right. It is NOT overtaking. If what you say was correct it would be 1) illegal to merge onto a motorway 2) Motorway traffic would ground to a halt.

    The RoTR is an interpretation of the law, not the law. Cyton has quoted the only thing a judge will care about. The initial "in slow moving traffic" wipes out the ability to undertake at normal speed on a motorway/duel carrigeway. Every word is important when you get into legal language.
    Do i agree with it no... and i'd like to think any waiting garda car would do the middle lane moron first (if they'd ever enforce basic stuff like this)


  • Options
    #34
    hognef
    Registered Users Posts: 826 ✭✭✭hognef


    overshoot wrote: »
    and i'd like to think any waiting garda car would do the middle lane moron first (if they'd ever enforce basic stuff like this)

    In my experience, the gardaí themselves often are the middle lane morons. They're not exactly leading by example (in any area of driving or driver behaviour), so I wouldn't be too confident.


  • Options
    #35
    shaunr68
    Registered Users Posts: 555 ✭✭✭shaunr68


    whomitconcerns wrote: »
    Try this fun on the M25 in UK...4 lanes, Im in lane 1....cross 3 lanes to overtake a car in lane 3 (of 4)..lane 2 is empty and lane 3 is almost empty. And then I have to move back to lane 1. Pain in the a$$ but it happens every time! And it becomes 5 lanes in places :(
    And it's drivers like those you encounter who manage either through incompetence, ignorance or laziness to turn a multi billion pound stretch of one of the busiest motorways in Europe into a dual carriageway. Infuriating.


  • Options
    #36
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    This comes up on Motors every so often and it's really simple..

    The OP is right.. only overtake on the right (UNLESS you're behind a car turning right and you're going straight on/left, OR the traffic on your right is moving slowly in heavy stop-start/congested traffic.. 60/70 km/h is not slowly)

    Undertaking on the left at speed is dangerous as most drivers (although they should!) will not expect a car to be there if they themselves change lanes into that left lane, and in my experience it's usually a manoeuvre performed by people weaving between 2/3/4 lanes of traffic to get maybe a car length ahead.

    Overtake on the right, or stay put until you can.

    You are correct. It is really simple.

    If you are travelling in the left lane of a motorway at 120 km/h and you come along side someone in the right lane at 80 km/h. You should maintain your speed and continue travelling in your lane at the same speed. This will obviously mean you will pass the car that is on your right. This is not overtaking.

    There is nothing in the rules of the road that prohibits you from maintaining your speed. In fact the rules of the road state "You must progress at a speed and in a way that avoids interference with other motorway traffic"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    did you read the post you quoted, which you agreed with and then contradicted.?


  • Options
    #38
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,350 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    dil999 wrote: »
    You are correct. It is really simple.

    If you are travelling in the left lane of a motorway at 120 km/h and you come along side someone in the right lane at 80 km/h. You should maintain your speed and continue travelling in your lane at the same speed. This will obviously mean you will pass the car that is on your right. This is not overtaking.

    There is nothing in the rules of the road that prohibits you from maintaining your speed. In fact the rules of the road state "You must progress at a speed and in a way that avoids interference with other motorway traffic"
    Wrong. This is overtaking.

    If you look at the dictionary definition "Catch up with and pass while travelling in the same direction." (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/overtake) or "an act or the process of moving past another vehicle or person travelling in the same direction" (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/overtaking) there is no requirement thst one has to change lanes for it to be overtaking.

    The legislation specifies thst one must overtake on the right with three specific exceptions permitted. Driving at 120kmh in the left lane, passing a car which is driving at 80kmh in the lane to your right is overtaking and is not one of the exceptions allowed.

    You can argue whether it is a good law or not but it is the law.


  • Options
    #39
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    FishOnABike wrote: »
    Wrong. This is overtaking.

    If you look at the dictionary definition "Catch up with and pass while travelling in the same direction." (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/overtake) or "an act or the process of moving past another vehicle or person travelling in the same direction" (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/overtaking) there is no requirement thst one has to change lanes for it to be overtaking.

    The legislation specifies thst one must overtake on the right with three specific exceptions permitted. Driving at 120kmh in the left lane, passing a car which is driving at 80kmh in the lane to your right is overtaking and is not one of the exceptions allowed.

    You can argue whether it is a good law or not but it is the law.

    Its NOT overtaking in the context of the rules of the road. Overtaking in the context of the rules of the road, is a maneuver that requires moving to one side, passing a car and moving back to your original lane.
    Basic common sense will tell you that maintaining your speed is not overtaking in this context.
    If what you say was correct, it would be illegal to merge onto a motorway, because you often need to enter in front of a car already on the motorway. Common sense is used by judges when interpreting the law, and definitions used in terms of the context in which they they appear.

    It is categorically not the law. If you thinks it is, show me in which road traffic act and in which section.


  • Options
    #40
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    Isambard wrote: »
    did you read the post you quoted, which you agreed with and then contradicted.?

    Basic comprehension. I agreed it was simple. Nothing else.


  • Options
    #41
    Esel
    Registered Users Posts: 22,002 ✭✭✭✭Esel


    "Judge, by my interpretation of the Rules of the Road, passing on the left is not overtaking. Therefore, you must dismiss the charge against me. Can I go now?"

    Not your ornery onager



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    Esel wrote: »
    "Judge, by my interpretation of the Rules of the Road, passing on the left is not overtaking. Therefore, you must dismiss the charge against me. Can I go now?"

    "Rules of the Road" is not Law!

    S.I. No. 294/1964 - Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964 is Law!


  • Options
    #43
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    Esel wrote: »
    "Judge, by my interpretation of the Rules of the Road, passing on the left is not overtaking. Therefore, you must dismiss the charge against me. Can I go now?"

    Have you ever in your heard of anyone being charged with any offence related to "travelling faster in the left lane than traffic on the right". No? that's because there is no such offence.


  • Options
    #44
    dtipp
    Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭dtipp


    Think we need expert views and evidence.
    Wonder what a garda or solicitor would say about this.
    And wonder did this ever come up in a court room.


  • Options
    #45
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    grogi wrote: »
    "Rules of the Road" is not Law!

    S.I. No. 294/1964 - Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964 is Law!

    Nobody could possibly interpret "overtaking" in the context of the 1964 SI as travelling faster in a left lane than traffic to your right. There were no dual carriageways or motorways in existence at the time.


  • Options
    #46
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    dtipp wrote: »
    Think we need expert views and evidence.
    Wonder what a garda or solicitor would say about this.
    And wonder did this ever come up in a court room.

    A solicitor maybe, The Gardai, as much as I respect and appreciate the job they do, are not always experts on the finer points of the law.

    I guarantee you there has never been a case.


  • Options
    #47
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,619 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    dil999 wrote: »
    Its NOT overtaking in the context of the rules of the road. Overtaking in the context of the rules of the road, is a maneuver that requires moving to one side, passing a car and moving back to your original lane.
    Basic common sense will tell you that maintaining your speed is not overtaking in this context.
    If what you say was correct, it would be illegal to merge onto a motorway, because you often need to enter in front of a car already on the motorway. Common sense is used by judges when interpreting the law, and definitions used in terms of the context in which they they appear.

    It is categorically not the law. If you thinks it is, show me in which road traffic act and in which section.

    Passing another car is overtaking. It's baffling that you cannot grasp this.


  • Options
    #48
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Passing another car is overtaking. It's baffling that you cannot grasp this.

    You are obviously easily baffled. In the context of the rules of the road it is not. Look up the word context. it might help you.


  • Options
    #49
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,350 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    dil999 wrote: »
    It is categorically not the law. If you thinks it is, show me in which road traffic act and in which section.
    S.I. No. 182/1997: ROAD TRAFFIC (TRAFFIC AND PARKING) REGULATIONS, 1997 see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=104783584&postcount=11


  • Options
    #50
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    the Law is quite clear. You may not pass on the left except on specific circumstances. The actual Law was quoted earlier, you havechosen to ignore it.


  • Options
    #51
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,619 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    dil999 wrote: »
    You are obviously easily baffled. In the context of the rules of the road it is not. Look up the word context. it might help you.

    I'm not.

    RTA makes it quite clear what's legal and what's not. It's also been spelt out several times for you already.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Esel
    Registered Users Posts: 22,002 ✭✭✭✭Esel


    But... but... but it's the Rules of the Road!

    Not your ornery onager



  • Options
    #53
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    I'm not.

    RTA makes it quite clear what's legal and what's not. It's also been spelt out several times for you already.

    It doesn't. As grogi stated, the relevant legislation is a 1964 Statutory Instrument (SI)

    Just because you or others say something on an internet forum doesn't make it correct. There is absolutely nothing that has been said on this thread that supports the argument you have been trying to make.

    Definitions in law are in the context of the legislation, and not something you pull off dictionary.com. You obviously can't grasp that simple principle, and that probably explains the bafflement you are experiencing. I am afraid, I can't help you any more with your state of confusion. Hopefully it passes before morning. Good night.


  • Options
    #54
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    dil999 wrote: »
    Definitions in law are in the context of the legislation, and not something you pull off dictionary.com.

    But there is no definition in said Act that would contradict a common understanding of the term 'overtaking'.


  • Options
    #55
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,350 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    grogi wrote: »
    But there is no definition in said Act that would contradict a common understanding of the term 'overtaking'.
    But what is the common understanding of the term 'overtaking'? It seems different people have a different understanding of the term.

    From the legislation overtaking is the act of passing traffic which is heading in the same direction. A driver should always overtake on the right except in the three specific cases provided for by the law.
    ( a ) 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 to turn to the left,
    ( b ) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to turn left at the next road junction and has signalled this intention,
    ( c ) in slow moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver's right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle.


  • Options
    #56
    the_pen_turner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,505 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    FishOnABike wrote: »
    But what is the common understanding of the term 'overtaking'? It seems different people have a different understanding of the term.

    From the legislation overtaking is the act of passing traffic which is heading in the same direction. A driver should always overtake on the right except in the three specific cases provided for by the law.
    ( a ) 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 to turn to the left,
    ( b ) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to turn left at the next road junction and has signalled this intention,
    ( c ) in slow moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver's right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle.

    so if I'm taking the next exit I can signal the manoeuvre and undertake


  • Options
    #57
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    FishOnABike wrote: »
    But what is the common understanding of the term 'overtaking'? It seems different people have a different understanding of the term.

    From the legislation overtaking is the act of passing traffic which is heading in the same direction. A driver should always overtake on the right except in the three specific cases provided for by the law.
    ( a ) 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 to turn to the left,
    ( b ) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to turn left at the next road junction and has signalled this intention,
    ( c ) in slow moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver's right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle.

    FishOnABike wrote: »
    From the legislation overtaking is the act of passing traffic which is heading in the same direction

    No its not. That is not stated anywhere in the legislation. Your argument falls down when you make stuff up.

    Also remember that there is also no definition of "slow moving traffic" in the legislation either. Is it 50 km/hr? Is it 100 km/hr? Does it depend on the context? Is 100 km/hr on a motorway considered slow? But not 50 km/hr in an urban setting?

    Legislation is not a scientific document. There is a reason we have judges barristers, solicitors.


  • Options
    #58
    the_pen_turner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,505 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    basically slow is only an opinion.
    to me it has to any speed lower than what you would expect the average driver to be doing.
    assuming weather conditions allow then most people would expect to be able to drive close to the speed limit. anything less than that would be considered slow.


  • Options
    #59
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    grogi wrote: »
    But there is no definition in said Act that would contradict a common understanding of the term 'overtaking'.

    There isn't and there doesn't have to be. I would argue that a "common understanding of the term overtaking" in the context of general motoring, and in the context of the legislation, is a specific maneuver that involves moving from lane a to lane b and back to lane a after passing out another vehicle or obstacle that was in lane a. That is a common understanding of 'overtaking'.
    Remember the legislation was originally written in 1964, and the concept of traffic in left hand lanes travelling faster than traffic in right hand lanes at speeds of 70mph did not exist. So the legislators are very unlikely to have considered that as a definition of overtaking.


  • Options
    #60
    dil999
    Registered Users Posts: 672 ✭✭✭dil999


    the_pen_turner wrote: »
    basically slow is only an opinion.
    to me it has to any speed lower than what you would expect the average driver to be doing.
    assuming weather conditions allow then most people would expect to be able to drive close to the speed limit. anything less than that would be considered slow.
    It is more likely to be considered in context. 100Km/hr might be considered slow on a motorway, but not in a 60Km/hr zone.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    FishOnABike
    Registered Users Posts: 4,350 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    dil999 wrote: »
    There isn't and there doesn't have to be. I would argue that a "common understanding of the term overtaking" in the context of general motoring, and in the context of the legislation, is a specific maneuver that involves moving from lane a to lane b and back to lane a after passing out another vehicle or obstacle that was in lane a. That is a common understanding of 'overtaking'.
    Remember the legislation was originally written in 1964, and the concept of traffic in left hand lanes travelling faster than traffic in right hand lanes at speeds of 70mph did not exist. So the legislators are very unlikely to have considered that as a definition of overtaking.

    The S.I. I referred to is from 1997, we definitety had two lane roads, dual carriageways and motorways so our legislators are likely to have taken the concept of traffic in left hand lanes travelling faster than traffic in right hand lanes at speeds of 70mph.

    The legislation clearly considers circumstances where overtaking does not involve having to change lanes and clearly states one should overtake on the right other than in the three exceptions explicitly provided for.


Advertisement