[Closed] Undertaking

IMHO its not whether it should be legal - its the fact that currently it isn't and far too many people are doing it....

Cheers

Danny B

No.
But middle lane hoggers should be much more vigerously persecuted. No that isn't a typo.

[i]vigerously persecuted. No that isn't a typo.[/i]

*goes off to google what vigerously means*

Bugger! And I checked how to spell persecuted too!

🙂

Should it be legal?

If you consider that the vast majority of drivers haven't even mastered the current system, I'd say that's a resounding NO.

The AA once recommended undertaking to be made legal, and that for me, was the end of the AA as a serious motoring organization.

More importantly..what do you think about overtaking? 😆

More importantly..what do you think about overtaking?

Well I wouldn't overtake a car which is undertaking - it's just not the done thing. Anyway I don't like overtaking whilst wearing my dancing shoes.

I do it all the time - therefore it should be made legal

it is legal [ if they are turning right for example]

TBH on motorways where I approach cars at my rate of knots [ often I do as much as 60 mph] on the inside lane and they have sat in the middle i just carry on - its not great but I assume safer than puling across three lanes then back in also at my speed I am a real pain t the outside [ fast] lane vehicles.

I thought technically undertaking involved changing lane to pass - is this correct?

Yeah, but what if you're undertaking somebody who was a senile old lady? Why does everybody keep missing the point?

Yeah, my understanding was you can pass a car on the left as long as you don't immediately pull in front of it afterwards. I knew it as "making progress" rather than under/overtaking.

I actually find driving on busy motorways in the slow lane quite relaxing - you are normally doing a similar speed to the fast lane and there is less of that start stop nonsense.

Yeah, but what if you're undertaking somebody who was a senile old lady? Why does everybody keep missing the point?

Assuming we are talking multiple lanes, my understanding was that it's not actually explicitly illegal, but could be deemed to be dangerous driving depending on the situation.. is there any specific legislation that proves this one way or the other?

We should charge per mile per lane with the middle & outside lanes more expensive
Maggie would have agreed!
That said the lefty's would declare its a class war on the poor 🙂

[i]Why does everybody keep missing the point? [/i]

I think you're confusing 'deliberatly putting an alternative interpretation on' with 'missing the point' 😉

Should it be legal?

Ever driven in the USA? Say, around a major city?

Is undertaking what an undertaker does?

It isn't illegal if the vehicle you are undertaking is moving "slower than the flow of traffic".

Canadians do it all the time as its legal there

It doesn't kill many of them, which is a real shame

you're undertaking somebody who was a senile old lady?

Well it was supposed to combine today's two popular threads to save everybody time, BBSB.

I'm not sure if MrsPoddy is the first one to get it, or the first one dim enough not to just ignore it.

molgrips - Member

Ever driven in the USA? Say, around a major city?

In the USA they drive on the right, and so what you percieve as undertaking, is actually overtaking correctly. Hope this helps. 😉

In the USA they drive on the right

That explains a lot, I did wonder why there were all driving on the wrong side of the road....

From the thread title I thought it was going to be some sick comment on what the undertaker of the funeral directors of the woman that dies today may do to the body 👿