To think this driving manoeuvre was both safe and legal?

[AmazonAmazine]

Arguing with my dad who was the passenger!

3 lane motorway. I was in the left lane, cruising around 70 as no one in front. Came up to a car in the centre lane doing around 50mph. The right lane was running fast, I’d guess over 70.

I assessed the safest thing to do was carry on being very vigilant and slow a little bit and steadily pass the slow car in my lane at around 60. The alternative was get behind it then attempt to accelerate into the fast flowing right lane, accelerating in between higher powered cars from a much lower speed. I’d been forced to slow a bit on approach already, there was no obvious gap in the right lane which everyone as crowding into on approach from the centre lane. The middle car clearly wasn’t shifting, the left lane ahead of me was very clear. The road wasn’t otherwise particularly busy, the right lane was just busy because of this car.

I was very aware, ultimately had a hard shoulder for emergency and I was watching the car well for any sign of switching lane.

iabu- you should have crossed back and forth over two lanes, as it’s always the passing lane
Ianbu- this was the safest way of dealing with the hazard.

Screenshot from the Askthepolice link someone put up earlier. The police consider it careless driving.

It’s quite noticeable- those in sensible tones who cite a source, eg ‘on my speed awareness course they said…’ seem to believe it’s ok.

Those who read half the Highway Code rule, or confuse a rule with an offence are outraged. People get very very entrenched in beliefs.

Considering it’s nearly 50/50 on the vote is pleasantly surprising. I reckon 80% of people on here change lanes 500 yards before lane merge due to roadworks rather than zipper merge. 25% on aibu are out to argue with anything, even the sky looking blue.

No it isn’t.

the Highway Code is a code, not a legal guide.

@ProfYaffle it says ‘May be…’ not ‘will be’. Which is exactly what I’m saying. It may well be careless driving. It’s not the definition of careless driving. Done safely there’s nothing there saying it a guaranteed offence regardless is there? It’s a case by case consideration

It’s not illegal.

the only charges that could be relevant are driving without due care and attention or dangerous driving.

both are vanishingly unlikely

it is however an offence to hog the middle lane and thus for dangerous manoeuvres in other drivers. The person who would have been charged in this situation is the middle lane hogger

Exactly OP not an offence in an of itself.

however middle lane hogging is.

But OP didn’t move to undertake. She stayed in her lane which was moving faster.

I always thought undertaking was illegal.

the worry is the middle lane hogger moves in without checking.

I have done what you did but try not to.

It explains alot about driving standards if people think its safer and the right thing to slow down to under 50mph on a motorway to match the speed of a middle lane hog rather than continuing on in your lane.

Even the left had move scenario. I accounted for it and watched them well. I had an empty hard shoulder. I simply would have gone left if had to. I’m sure many of us at some point in our motorway driving have had to evasively avoid a person changing lanes without looking. The classic person who swerves into the middle lane without indicating, just as you’ve been indicating there to overtake. Or the lorry driver who can’t see you. I don’t want to have to do it, but despite having a bright red car I’ve had to do a few times. Same journey saw a van drifting lanes!

But you have to check as all the HGV use that lane.

But it obviously bothered you enough to come here ask the question and then still insist you did nothing wrong, despite it being pointed out multiple times that whilst what you did was fine, you really should have overtaken correctly and that had their been an accident, you would have been at fault.

What was hoping to get from this thread? An echo chamber that you did nothing wrong? You don't seem to be prepared to accept that you should overtake as opposed to undertake or accept that if there was an accident you would have been at fault.

The police specifically quote the example of undertaking a middle lane hogger as being careless driving.

She didnt, she actually slowed down in the left hand lane to match the speed of the middle lane driver.

My guess would be it's one of those circumstances where if something bad had happened (eg, middle lane guy doesn't see you in his blind spot and pulls over) you could potentially be found liable. I interpret it as a grey area that's best avoided. I've done similar to you but generally try not to.

It’s been worthwhile because some people have shared the info given directly on speed awareness courses. That’s really useful and was what I was looking for- if anyone had direct knowledge

Definition of a Rule

. one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct or procedure within a particular area of activity.

I’m guessing you passed your driving test before the theory test was introduced?

Not true. The highway code is a mixture of legal requirements and guidance. The key is in the wording of particular rules within the guidance. A key indicator of when something is a legal requirement is the use of "must/must not" rather than "should/should not".

However even breaching should/should not rules can be used as evidence against you in support of a prosecution of a traffic offence such as driving without due care and attention.

Basically, follow the highway code please.

It’s been worthwhile because some people have shared the info given directly on speed awareness courses. That’s really useful and was what I was looking for- if anyone had direct knowledge

A person saying they heard something on a speed awareness course is not a valid source.

According to my son’s theory test guide book….

Undertaking a vehicle is allowed:

• in slow-moving traffic queues, when the vehicles in the right-hand lane are moving more slowly
• when the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right
• when you’re in a one-way street

Had you selected an answer

”because a vehicle was hogging the middle lane”

you would have been marked as incorrect in your theory test

And given the source obviously has a pretty lax approach to the law and rules given they were on a speed awareness course… I’m not inclined to really listen to their perspective on driving anyway!

Lol… does it say ‘is ONLY allowed’? Nope. It doesn’t say ‘when a vehicle is broken down in the right lane’ or ‘when directed to stay in lane on a motorway gantry’ or ‘if directed by a police officer’ or ‘if a street cleaning vehicle is cleaning the right hand gutters or a tractor with a trailer is slowly cutting roadside shrubs’. It’s not an extensive list of every possible scenario that’s ever happened on a road. It’s a concise guide for new drivers.

Seriously though. If, like on every Aibu thread, you ignore the posters who can’t express themselves without using insults (you are a danger!!!!!), quote half bits of things (ignore the words like May or the next sentence), jump to extreme presumptions (like you’re still arguing with your dad) it’s not that difficult to get a sensible opinion.
Its how to read Aibu nowadays