For me, while lane-hoggers are are enormously irritating, they pale into insignificance compared to people using their phones to text and make calls.
There is *no* reasons to have a phone in the car with you, if you are driving alone. You are *either* driving *or* you are free to make and receive calls and texts. No middle ground. If you're on a journey where you want to have your phone with you when you get there, stick it in the boot.
People driving alone with phones in the car should be fined and given points on the spot. No exceptions.
Agree. I never use my phone while driving but now I come to think of it I better 'stick it in the boot' in case it rings and I have an uncontrollable urge to answer it. I better stick all my CDs in the boot too in case I have an urge to change one. Also, I sometimes keep a water bottle in the car, will have to give that the same treatment. After all, I have NO self control and anything I can get my hands on I'll almost certainly fiddle with, at the expense of focusing on the road.
Leroy, no offence but what a selfish post, okay, so just because the speedlimit is 70 you see no reason to move to the nearside lane because people shouldn't be overtaking you anyway? did you really just write that?
Next time you go on a Mway, do that in the outside lane, see how long you last.
If people want to do 80 mph (most do at times) let them run the risk with the law, but you don't need to prove a point to them just because of your own agenda, risking peoples lives you are pal.
As bangkok mentioned try driving in Thailand or Laos. They will overtake on blind bends and on top of Hills. In Middle East they drive on the hard shoulder all the time to avoid even the slightest delay. Both have the mentality that it's Gods will if they die ( Thais my Buddha amulet will protect me, Muslims it's inshallah)
I have just been banned in Singapore for 2 speeding offences. So I won't be driving my Evoque for a year!
For me, while lane-hoggers are are enormously irritating, they pale into insignificance compared to people using their phones to text and make calls.
There is *no* reasons to have a phone in the car with you, if you are driving alone. You are *either* driving *or* you are free to make and receive calls and texts. No middle ground. If you're on a journey where you want to have your phone with you when you get there, stick it in the boot.
People driving alone with phones in the car should be fined and given points on the spot. No exceptions.
Agree. I never use my phone while driving but now I come to think of it I better 'stick it in the boot' in case it rings and I have an uncontrollable urge to answer it. I better stick all my CDs in the boot too in case I have an urge to change one. Also, I sometimes keep a water bottle in the car, will have to give that the same treatment. After all, I have NO self control and anything I can get my hands on I'll almost certainly fiddle with, at the expense of focusing on the road.
Good for you. Because, after all, there's nothing more irritating than a selfish driver who is more focused on his short-term convenience than the safety of the people in cars around them.
Leroy, no offence but what a selfish post, okay, so just because the speedlimit is 70 you see no reason to move to the nearside lane because people shouldn't be overtaking you anyway? did you really just write that?
Next time you go on a Mway, do that in the outside lane, see how long you last.
If people want to do 80 mph (most do at times) let them run the risk with the law, but you don't need to prove a point to them just because of your own agenda, risking peoples lives you are pal.
You misread my post (unsurprising, since you're from Sheffield... )
I was merely indicating the absurdity of a situation where people are moaning about someone preventing them from breaking the law. FWIW, I sit in the middle lane most of the time. I do about 75-80 probably 90% of the time, and when I look in my rearview mirror I never see people stuck up my arsehole - they use the fast lane. Like I said - anyone doing 65 in the middle lane needs their head examined, but I maintain that doing slightly over the speed limit in the middle lane causes no trouble for anyone except arseholes who just want to drive their car like they're playing GTA
As someone who passed their driving test a year and a half ago but is fairly clued up on driving having done extra driving courses as driving is involved with my job, I would say the problem is education.. when you learn to drive you are taught how to pass the test.. ie how to control your vehicle not how actually to drive! With most of my friends and family that are a similar age they pass and they really don't have a clue! For me there should be a compulsory pass plus driving course only for a couple of hours or so where you learn things like lane driving etc it would have to be regulated and a maximum price set but for me you shouldn't be able to drive until this has taken place..
Classic examples of friends poor driving.. I'm going 70 I am supposed to be in the outside lane... Another one didn't realise to turn right at a roundabout you need the right hand lane..
Leroy, no offence but what a selfish post, okay, so just because the speedlimit is 70 you see no reason to move to the nearside lane because people shouldn't be overtaking you anyway? did you really just write that?
Next time you go on a Mway, do that in the outside lane, see how long you last.
If people want to do 80 mph (most do at times) let them run the risk with the law, but you don't need to prove a point to them just because of your own agenda, risking peoples lives you are pal.
You misread my post (unsurprising, since you're from Sheffield... )
I was merely indicating the absurdity of a situation where people are moaning about someone preventing them from breaking the law. FWIW, I sit in the middle lane most of the time. I do about 75-80 probably 90% of the time, and when I look in my rearview mirror I never see people stuck up my arsehole - they use the fast lane. Like I said - anyone doing 65 in the middle lane needs their head examined, but I maintain that doing slightly over the speed limit in the middle lane causes no trouble for anyone except arseholes who just want to drive their car like they're playing GTA
But this is just terribly poor driving! You will be causing traffic problems without even noticing.. The middle lane should only be used if here is someone in the inside lane to overtake once overtaken you get on and stay there until there is another car to overtake where you follow the same procedure! Likewise with the outside lane.. If you and every other selfish driver like you did this then there would be a noticeable difference in traffic flow and journeys would take much less time.. In my opinion bad lane driving should be a fine able offence!
Not true. This is based on one study that has been repeatedly discredited. It's the same mentality that sees people try and foist mandatory helmets on cyclists because they prevent deaths from head injuries - people just believe things that they think are true, without actually knowing the facts.
Leroy, no offence but what a selfish post, okay, so just because the speedlimit is 70 you see no reason to move to the nearside lane because people shouldn't be overtaking you anyway? did you really just write that?
Next time you go on a Mway, do that in the outside lane, see how long you last.
If people want to do 80 mph (most do at times) let them run the risk with the law, but you don't need to prove a point to them just because of your own agenda, risking peoples lives you are pal.
You misread my post (unsurprising, since you're from Sheffield... )
I was merely indicating the absurdity of a situation where people are moaning about someone preventing them from breaking the law. FWIW, I sit in the middle lane most of the time. I do about 75-80 probably 90% of the time, and when I look in my rearview mirror I never see people stuck up my arsehole - they use the fast lane. Like I said - anyone doing 65 in the middle lane needs their head examined, but I maintain that doing slightly over the speed limit in the middle lane causes no trouble for anyone except arseholes who just want to drive their car like they're playing GTA
The thing is by stay in a lane that isn't the furthest most lane when you're not overtaking is breaking the Highway Code and I believe it is now an offence to 'middle-lane hog', so by preventing one person from breaking the law (ie travelling in excess of 70) you yourself are breaking another law.
There is also the problem that not everyone's speedometer is calibrated exactly the same and there are large variations depending on the manufacturer and age of the car. Someone who is doing 65 in reality could believe that are doing 70 because that's what their speedometer says. Meanwhile someone behind them who is doing 65 in reality but believes he is only doing 68 because the speedometer says 68 and he's stuck behind the person in front doing 65. The person behind both of them has a sat-nav that says that he is only going 65 gets annoyed at both the people in front of him and undertakes at 70 according to his sat-nav.
There are two things that you are meant to do if you are being tail-gated:
- keep enough distance between you and anything ahead as you will need to brake less rapidly to give the car behind time to brake - pull over or change to the left hand lane when possible if they are persistently tail-gating so the culprit doesn't smash into your tail-gate
Tail-gaters are complete idiots but by obstructing a tail-gater you are only endangering yourself and other road users. I bet most people who get hit by a tail-gater they were wilfully obstructing think in hindsight 'I wish I had moved out of his way'.
Not true. This is based on one study that has been repeatedly discredited. It's the same mentality that sees people try and foist mandatory helmets on cyclists because they prevent deaths from head injuries - people just believe things that they think are true, without actually knowing the facts.
Whether you like it or not what you're doing is against the Highway Code and if you're ever in a situation where you're in an accident it will be viewed that you caused the accident by middle lane hogging.
Not true. This is based on one study that has been repeatedly discredited. It's the same mentality that sees people try and foist mandatory helmets on cyclists because they prevent deaths from head injuries - people just believe things that they think are true, without actually knowing the facts.
Absolutely true.. The counties with the best road flow least accidents and fewest road delays are the ones where people use lanes properly! I have done many driving courses and this is what they major on.. can't remember the country they use as an example but the difference was noticeable.. The trouble is everyone has to do it then everyone benefits.. If you get a few selfish idiots then it ruins it for everyone and people say oh it doesn't work...
Not true. This is based on one study that has been repeatedly discredited. It's the same mentality that sees people try and foist mandatory helmets on cyclists because they prevent deaths from head injuries - people just believe things that they think are true, without actually knowing the facts.
Whether you like it or not what you're doing is against the Highway Code and if you're ever in a situation where you're in an accident it will be viewed that you caused the accident by middle lane hogging.
The highway code also tells you that the speed limit is 70. So my initial point stands. Unless the traffic in the left hand lane is doing under the speed limit, technically you can't legally pass it in the middle Lane. You see what I'm getting at?
Not true. This is based on one study that has been repeatedly discredited. It's the same mentality that sees people try and foist mandatory helmets on cyclists because they prevent deaths from head injuries - people just believe things that they think are true, without actually knowing the facts.
Whether you like it or not what you're doing is against the Highway Code and if you're ever in a situation where you're in an accident it will be viewed that you caused the accident by middle lane hogging.
The highway code also tells you that the speed limit is 70. So my initial point stands. Unless the traffic in the left hand lane is doing under the speed limit, technically you can't legally pass it in the middle Lane. You see what I'm getting at?
I don't see what your getting at as on every motorway journey there are always cars going below 70 for whatever reason..
Okay Leroy let's set aside for now the fact that you seem quite happy to conclude that it doesn't matter what a driver is doing in the middle lane as long as the drivers in the outside lane are exceeding the speed limit. (Although personally I would argue that two wrongs don't make a right and I'm certain an argument of someone else breaking the law somehow precludes another person's responsibilities to abide by it is not a defence that would have much chance of success in court.)
Instead lets look at safety. First, if you are in the nearside lane on a dual carriageway, you are as far away as it is possible to get from traffic coming in the other direction. This is likely to be a good thing in the event that, say, a HGV suddenly decides to plough through the crash barrier and smash into vehicles travelling on the opposite carriageway. Second, if your car has a sudden catastrophic failure, engine seizure, tyre blow out or whatever, (or perhaps most likely windscreen failure) it is much easier and safer for you, in a rapidly de-accelerating vehicle to get yourself on to the hard shoulder if you are travelling in lane adjacent to it. Finally, you might think you are travelling at 70mph but car speedometers cannot be accurate because of the effects of tyre wear. They are set up to be deliberately optimistic because the law says a speedo must never show less than the actual speed but can show up to 110% of actual speed. So if your true speed is 70mph, your speedo could legally be reading up to 77mph but never less than 70mph. Or to put it another way, if your speedo is reading 70mph, you won’t be doing more than 70mph but it’s possible you might actually only be travelling at only 63.6mph. If you have a satnav which gives mph data, you'll see these discrepancies at work.
I think I've now given you a total of about seven reasons why it is correct, lawful, polite and safer to use the nearside lane whenever possible but you carry on doing what you think is better.
The Highway Code also gives stopping distances, not many adhere to those especially on motorways. That is my pet hate. Most motorways around London are too busy to change lanes as you are supposed to. Seth was spot on. I don't think middle lane hugging is unsafe though, as opposed to excessive speed, changing lanes without indicating, overtaking on the inside etc.
Using a mobile phone while driving is an offence and people get done for it all the time.
This thread is a perfect example of why the standard of driving is poor. 3 pages of posts and everyone thinks their way of doing it is correct. Nobody has read another post and replied 'oh perhaps I have been doing it wrong all this time'.
Sadly until those who have passed their test stop thinking their driving is perfectly fine nothing will change. I include myself in that. I have had a fair bit more driver training than most and still make mistakes. I try and learn from them but I am sure I still have habits that other road users would find irritating (that said if you try and point them out I will drive alongside you making rude hand gestures).
I don't think middle lane hugging is unsafe though, as opposed to excessive speed, changing lanes without indicating, overtaking on the inside etc.
Speeding, changing lanes without indicating and overtaking on the inside are all actively unsafe, because the very act of doing them endangers other people.
Middle lane hogging is passively unsafe - it isn't endangering in of itself, but it can create a situation that is in itself unsafe (such as a tailback or tailgating). As cafcfan explained excellently, in the event of an emergency, it is also not the safest place to be. If you have an emergency situation whilst in the middle-lane (such a car issue eg puncture, brake failure, or a health issue such as a heart-attack or something else that would render you to not be in control of your vehicle), you are twice as likely to hit another vehicle if you are in the middle lane as there is no safe exit to your left or right hand side. At least if you're on the left or right hand lanes, you have a hard shoulder or a central reservation you can pull into (although aborting your journey in a central reservation is extremely hazardous but better than hitting a people carrier filled with kids, causing it to spin and hit a lorry side-on, killing all the passengers). The general rule on UK roads is 'keep left, give way to the right'.
Once I was driving to the traffic lights at Lee Green from Blackheath. As you approach there, there are often pedestrians walking across the road, parked vehicles moving out, and generally stuff that isn't just folk driving along. The visibility is OK, but not perfectly straight either. Anyway I am driving along probably around 30mph, but had to brake and slow down for something or another I was anticipating. At that moment there was a huge horn blast from what turned out to be a Chelsea tractor tailgating me...made me jump. When said vehicle pulled alongside me at the lights, I looked at the driver with a 'whaaaat?' expression, and she shouted at me 'why don't you look in your mirrors before slamming on the brakes?'. Can anybody at all explain her mentality? I drove a motorbike for 14 years, and looking back don't know how I survived that experience. I used to imagine all other drivers were psychopaths who wanted to kill me, that I am invisible, and they will none of them follow the assumptions of the highway code anyway. I still drive with that attitude now I'm in a car. Final point (made before), when you turn off a main road into a side road, you're supposed to wait for any pedestrians to cross said side road before you do so, they're not supposed to pause for you as you sweep around that corner. How many of us think the pedestrians ought to wait? Is it because we think 'well I will only take a moment, they won't have to wait long, whereas if I wait for the pedestrians I will be held up longer than they would've been'?
Not often I more or less agree with Leroy as the archives will tell but on this he is pretty much right.
The Highway Code says pull over if the road is CLEAR which I (and I am sure Leroy too) do.
However in busy traffic, such as the A2 example mentioned higher up the thread, it is actually more dangerous to continually lane hop. As long as you are moving faster than the lane to your left and overtaking vehicles, unless the lane in front of you slows for some reason when obviously you cannot, then it really doesn't matter.
The cardinal sin is to stick in the same lane when someone is behind you if the road in front and to your left is clear.
As one who has driven 25k miles a year or more for more years than I care to admit to Seth is right too in assuming every other road user is a congenital idiot.
When said vehicle pulled alongside me at the lights, I looked at the driver with a 'whaaaat?' expression, and she shouted at me 'why don't you look in your mirrors before slamming on the brakes?'. Can anybody at all explain her mentality?
I am currently learning and I am taught to look in the mirrors whenever I speed up or slow down/brake unless it is an emergency stop. That is what I think it might be, I don't get why you would get annoyed about it, if you have to stop or slow down there is usually a valid reason.
I am surprised by the amount of people that put themselves in dangerous positions just to get round me whilst on my lessons. I know it can be annoying being stuck behind a learner but risking a crash because you don't want to go at the speed limit. I know some learners might go slower but I am always on the limit, but some people see learner and do stupid things to avoid them.
And on the pedestrian crossing scenario has the pedestrian already started crossing? Because I once stopped before I turned into a side road as there was a pedestrian waiting to cross and was told that was the wrong thing to do because you aren't meant to encourage pedestrians onto the road.
You're right, rule 170 says 'if they have started to cross', so that means even one foot off the pavement onto the road.
Even if you look in your mirrors when you start to brake, and you see there is something tailgating you, what are you supposed to do, drive on and have an accident or run somebody/thing over because the vehicle behind is too close?
Final point (made before), when you turn off a main road into a side road, you're supposed to wait for any pedestrians to cross said side road before you do so, they're not supposed to pause for you as you sweep around that corner. How many of us think the pedestrians ought to wait? Is it because we think 'well I will only take a moment, they won't have to wait long, whereas if I wait for the pedestrians I will be held up longer than they would've been'?
No we think that because it's what the Highway Code says! The Highway Code (170) states that pedestrians only have priority if they have started to cross. Otherwise they are supposed to wait for the vehicle(s) to pass. From the pedestrian bit of the Highway Code: At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing (my emphasis) and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way.
However,taking into account the chances of a pedestrian either having read or remembered the Code, it's probably best to be cautious! (Especially if said pedestrian is attired in a pair of Dr Dre Beats. If they are it probably explains why they are walking rather than driving as they'll still be paying off the loan they took out to buy them!)
Final point (made before), when you turn off a main road into a side road, you're supposed to wait for any pedestrians to cross said side road before you do so, they're not supposed to pause for you as you sweep around that corner. How many of us think the pedestrians ought to wait? Is it because we think 'well I will only take a moment, they won't have to wait long, whereas if I wait for the pedestrians I will be held up longer than they would've been'?
No we think that because it's what the Highway Code says! The Highway Code (170) states that pedestrians only have priority if they have started to cross. Otherwise they are supposed to wait for the vehicle(s) to pass. From the pedestrian bit of the Highway Code: At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing (my emphasis) and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way.
However,taking into account the chances of a pedestrian either having read or remembered the Code, it's probably best to be cautious! (Especially if said pedestrian is attired in a pair of Dr Dre Beats. If they are it probably explains why they are walking rather than driving as they'll still be paying off the loan they took out to buy them!)
Final point (made before), when you turn off a main road into a side road, you're supposed to wait for any pedestrians to cross said side road before you do so, they're not supposed to pause for you as you sweep around that corner. How many of us think the pedestrians ought to wait? Is it because we think 'well I will only take a moment, they won't have to wait long, whereas if I wait for the pedestrians I will be held up longer than they would've been'?
No we think that because it's what the Highway Code says! The Highway Code (170) states that pedestrians only have priority if they have started to cross. Otherwise they are supposed to wait for the vehicle(s) to pass. From the pedestrian bit of the Highway Code: At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing (my emphasis) and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way.
However,taking into account the chances of a pedestrian either having read or remembered the Code, it's probably best to be cautious! (Especially if said pedestrian is attired in a pair of Dr Dre Beats. If they are it probably explains why they are walking rather than driving as they'll still be paying off the loan they took out to buy them!)
The thing that winds me up the most are people who don't know how to drive roundabouts. People who stop at roundabouts when there's nothing coming and people who are in the wrong lane when going round the roundabout because it's quicker.
When I was learning to drive my instructor said, think of the roundabout as a clock. If your exit is after 12 but before 6 then you have to Be in the right hand lane and if it's after 6 but before 12 then the left/middle lane. Made sense to me. People who go on the left hand lane to use (what is usually) the third exit are beyond comprehension and shouldn't be driving
Lots oh Highway Code stattos on here, quite impressed
Although I don't need the Highway Code to know that anyone coasting in the middle lane of the motorway with the inside lane empty, be it at 60, 70 or 120 is a bloody awful driver
Comments
Next time you go on a Mway, do that in the outside lane, see how long you last.
If people want to do 80 mph (most do at times) let them run the risk with the law, but you don't need to prove a point to them just because of your own agenda, risking peoples lives you are pal.
Both have the mentality that it's Gods will if they die ( Thais my Buddha amulet will protect me, Muslims it's inshallah)
I have just been banned in Singapore for 2 speeding offences. So I won't be driving my Evoque for a year!
I was merely indicating the absurdity of a situation where people are moaning about someone preventing them from breaking the law. FWIW, I sit in the middle lane most of the time. I do about 75-80 probably 90% of the time, and when I look in my rearview mirror I never see people stuck up my arsehole - they use the fast lane. Like I said - anyone doing 65 in the middle lane needs their head examined, but I maintain that doing slightly over the speed limit in the middle lane causes no trouble for anyone except arseholes who just want to drive their car like they're playing GTA
Classic examples of friends poor driving..
I'm going 70 I am supposed to be in the outside lane...
Another one didn't realise to turn right at a roundabout you need the right hand lane..
Ah no - there's a couple in there
There is also the problem that not everyone's speedometer is calibrated exactly the same and there are large variations depending on the manufacturer and age of the car. Someone who is doing 65 in reality could believe that are doing 70 because that's what their speedometer says. Meanwhile someone behind them who is doing 65 in reality but believes he is only doing 68 because the speedometer says 68 and he's stuck behind the person in front doing 65. The person behind both of them has a sat-nav that says that he is only going 65 gets annoyed at both the people in front of him and undertakes at 70 according to his sat-nav.
There are two things that you are meant to do if you are being tail-gated:
- keep enough distance between you and anything ahead as you will need to brake less rapidly to give the car behind time to brake
- pull over or change to the left hand lane when possible if they are persistently tail-gating so the culprit doesn't smash into your tail-gate
Tail-gaters are complete idiots but by obstructing a tail-gater you are only endangering yourself and other road users. I bet most people who get hit by a tail-gater they were wilfully obstructing think in hindsight 'I wish I had moved out of his way'.
Instead lets look at safety. First, if you are in the nearside lane on a dual carriageway, you are as far away as it is possible to get from traffic coming in the other direction. This is likely to be a good thing in the event that, say, a HGV suddenly decides to plough through the crash barrier and smash into vehicles travelling on the opposite carriageway. Second, if your car has a sudden catastrophic failure, engine seizure, tyre blow out or whatever, (or perhaps most likely windscreen failure) it is much easier and safer for you, in a rapidly de-accelerating vehicle to get yourself on to the hard shoulder if you are travelling in lane adjacent to it.
Finally, you might think you are travelling at 70mph but car speedometers cannot be accurate because of the effects of tyre wear. They are set up to be deliberately optimistic because the law says a speedo must never show less than the actual speed but can show up to 110% of actual speed. So if your true speed is 70mph, your speedo could legally be reading up to 77mph but never less than 70mph. Or to put it another way, if your speedo is reading 70mph, you won’t be doing more than 70mph but it’s possible you might actually only be travelling at only 63.6mph.
If you have a satnav which gives mph data, you'll see these discrepancies at work.
I think I've now given you a total of about seven reasons why it is correct, lawful, polite and safer to use the nearside lane whenever possible but you carry on doing what you think is better.
Most motorways around London are too busy to change lanes as you are supposed to. Seth was spot on. I don't think middle lane hugging is unsafe though, as opposed to excessive speed, changing lanes without indicating, overtaking on the inside etc.
Using a mobile phone while driving is an offence and people get done for it all the time.
Sadly until those who have passed their test stop thinking their driving is perfectly fine nothing will change. I include myself in that. I have had a fair bit more driver training than most and still make mistakes. I try and learn from them but I am sure I still have habits that other road users would find irritating (that said if you try and point them out I will drive alongside you making rude hand gestures).
Middle lane hogging is passively unsafe - it isn't endangering in of itself, but it can create a situation that is in itself unsafe (such as a tailback or tailgating). As cafcfan explained excellently, in the event of an emergency, it is also not the safest place to be. If you have an emergency situation whilst in the middle-lane (such a car issue eg puncture, brake failure, or a health issue such as a heart-attack or something else that would render you to not be in control of your vehicle), you are twice as likely to hit another vehicle if you are in the middle lane as there is no safe exit to your left or right hand side. At least if you're on the left or right hand lanes, you have a hard shoulder or a central reservation you can pull into (although aborting your journey in a central reservation is extremely hazardous but better than hitting a people carrier filled with kids, causing it to spin and hit a lorry side-on, killing all the passengers). The general rule on UK roads is 'keep left, give way to the right'.
Anyway I am driving along probably around 30mph, but had to brake and slow down for something or another I was anticipating. At that moment there was a huge horn blast from what turned out to be a Chelsea tractor tailgating me...made me jump.
When said vehicle pulled alongside me at the lights, I looked at the driver with a 'whaaaat?' expression, and she shouted at me 'why don't you look in your mirrors before slamming on the brakes?'.
Can anybody at all explain her mentality?
I drove a motorbike for 14 years, and looking back don't know how I survived that experience. I used to imagine all other drivers were psychopaths who wanted to kill me, that I am invisible, and they will none of them follow the assumptions of the highway code anyway. I still drive with that attitude now I'm in a car.
Final point (made before), when you turn off a main road into a side road, you're supposed to wait for any pedestrians to cross said side road before you do so, they're not supposed to pause for you as you sweep around that corner. How many of us think the pedestrians ought to wait? Is it because we think 'well I will only take a moment, they won't have to wait long, whereas if I wait for the pedestrians I will be held up longer than they would've been'?
The Highway Code says pull over if the road is CLEAR which I (and I am sure Leroy too) do.
However in busy traffic, such as the A2 example mentioned higher up the thread, it is actually more dangerous to continually lane hop. As long as you are moving faster than the lane to your left and overtaking vehicles, unless the lane in front of you slows for some reason when obviously you cannot, then it really doesn't matter.
The cardinal sin is to stick in the same lane when someone is behind you if the road in front and to your left is clear.
As one who has driven 25k miles a year or more for more years than I care to admit to Seth is right too in assuming every other road user is a congenital idiot.
I am surprised by the amount of people that put themselves in dangerous positions just to get round me whilst on my lessons. I know it can be annoying being stuck behind a learner but risking a crash because you don't want to go at the speed limit. I know some learners might go slower but I am always on the limit, but some people see learner and do stupid things to avoid them.
And on the pedestrian crossing scenario has the pedestrian already started crossing? Because I once stopped before I turned into a side road as there was a pedestrian waiting to cross and was told that was the wrong thing to do because you aren't meant to encourage pedestrians onto the road.
Even if you look in your mirrors when you start to brake, and you see there is something tailgating you, what are you supposed to do, drive on and have an accident or run somebody/thing over because the vehicle behind is too close?
No we think that because it's what the Highway Code says! The Highway Code (170) states that pedestrians only have priority if they have started to cross. Otherwise they are supposed to wait for the vehicle(s) to pass.
From the pedestrian bit of the Highway Code:
At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing (my emphasis) and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way.
However,taking into account the chances of a pedestrian either having read or remembered the Code, it's probably best to be cautious! (Especially if said pedestrian is attired in a pair of Dr Dre Beats. If they are it probably explains why they are walking rather than driving as they'll still be paying off the loan they took out to buy them!)
:-)
When I was learning to drive my instructor said, think of the roundabout as a clock. If your exit is after 12 but before 6 then you have to Be in the right hand lane and if it's after 6 but before 12 then the left/middle lane. Made sense to me. People who go on the left hand lane to use (what is usually) the third exit are beyond comprehension and shouldn't be driving
Although I don't need the Highway Code to know that anyone coasting in the middle lane of the motorway with the inside lane empty, be it at 60, 70 or 120 is a bloody awful driver