sbob, I don’t believe you’ve looked properly

And I don’t believe you know what you’re talking about.
What do you want to do, put it to a vote? 😕

undertook 50+ cars on the M25 last night. 4 lanes, outside 3 doing 50-60 ish, and nothing in the ‘slow’ lane, so I did 70.

Went on for miles!

sbob, I don’t believe you’ve looked properly

prove it

Googling this there seems to be no specific offence of ‘undertaking’ – however ‘undertaking’ is against the rules of the highway code. If you get caught ‘undertaking’ then the police could consider that you were either driving carelessly or driving dangerously, both of which are a driving offence. The definitions of these are:

The definition of ‘careless driving’ is this:
“. . . when the accused’s driving falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case”

Dangerous driving’ is as follows:
“A person drives dangerously when:
The way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver
AND
It would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous”

So ‘undertaking’ although not a defined offence, could easily see you falling foul of one of the above two catagories, particularly if your general standard of driving prior/during/after the undertake was poor.

It seems that the more likely scenario though if pulled over for ‘undertaking’ would be a stern talking to or a caution, since proving a case of careless or dangerous driving would often be more difficult (unlike an offence like speeding where proof is easy).

Hope that clears it up?

Aren’t dangerous and careless driving on the statute ?

All that’s unclear is whether “pure” undertaking qualifies as such.

I’d like to think that, since we’re all supposed to “know” it on sitting out test of minimum competence, the HC is illustrative of the behaviour that a competent and careful driver might exhibit and was appalled that the judge said that.

Regardless, I prefer to interpret the CPS’s nomination of undertaking (without any listed “aggravating” behaviour) as at least potential grounds for careless driving

thisisnotaspoon – Member

undertook

Passed on the left, Mr Spoon, passed on the left.

😉

Regardless, I prefer to interpret the CPS’s nomination of undertaking (without any listed “aggravating” behaviour) as at least potential grounds for careless driving

Interpret all you like, but only presenting an example case will actually prove you correct…

…I presume you’d accept the same applies to IAM, and I’ve just covered the HC above.

Of course, in that sentence they were cited in support of the inappropiateness bit (that I would like to see a lawyer argue underpins competent and careful as I said above)

I don’t think it is semantics to point out how the law works in this country.

As we all know, overtaking on a blind bend and killing a cyclist by hitting her head-on is definitively NOT in any way illegal. What I don’t know (but suspect that, say, video evidence would secure a conviction if pursued) is whether undertaking is.

Googling this there seems to be no specific offence of ‘undertaking’ – however ‘undertaking’ is against the rules of the highway code.

Just covered that one from a legal standpoint – see judges instruction to jury.

was appalled that the judge said that.

Likewise, but said it he did, and given it doesn’t appear to have been reported on and the judge hasn’t been censured you have to assume there is nothing uncommon about that. We therefore have a legal judgement on HC “should” constituting careless driving right there.

I prefer to interpret the CPS’s nomination of undertaking (without any listed “aggravating” behaviour) as at least potential grounds for careless driving

I note your preference to potentially consider it, however note that what might make it come under that is the manner of overtaking on the left rather than any other “aggravating” behaviour, so would hardly expect further clarification (particularly bearing in mind that is only CPS guidance, which the CPS actually routinely ignores).

Passed on the left, Mr Spoon, passed on the left.

😆
(twatty, mind)

I actually mentioned that to Mr Spoon as undertaking does not exist in the law. You pass, and you do so either on the left or the right.

Unfortunately the law is one place where semantics are important.

Well I stuck with it and read the while thread. Lost the will to breathe briefly but was interested to see if anything conclusive came out of it. To my mind, it’s clear that undertaking is a bad idea but sometimes necessary. Still wouldn’t do it anywhere near a police car, other than the congested traffic scenario.

And it’s also obvious that drivers who undertake tend to be dangerous cockwombles.

Thanks Ian, but not sure I should be taking advise on my driving ability from someone who posts on a cycling forum about ‘Strictly’

I can recommend help for that kind of obsessive behaviour.

You could argue though that often speeding is a conscious choice made by an otherwise competent and fully aware driver. Answering a phone call, whilst certainly a distraction, does not mean that the driver is fundamentally unskilled or ignorant.

No, but speeding and distraction (unlike not moving to the left quickly) are major causes of death and serious injury on UK roads, there not just words on a forum by the way, its your Mum or Daughter or whoever you care about splattered across the road and someone else’s every day because a driver just like you thinks their good enough to drive and talk on the phone or a speed limit is optional.

But – people who have so little awareness that they are not even sure which lane to be in, or are completely oblivious to a car directly behind them trying to pass – well that’s a whole new level of danger in my book.

But only in “your book” which is an complete load of bollocks developed from watching too much Clarkson, reading the Mail and listening to your mate Dave down the Dog and Duck who say we’re all been overrun by them foreigners who drive on the wrong side of the road.
Show me the numbers that support your arguments please, were is this link between not moving left and some consequence worse than we know is caused by the actions you think are ok?

Calm down 😀

It’s a fair point – anyone who sits in the overtaking lane needlessly doing the same speed as the traffic in the left hand lane is likely to be a less than good driver. For want of a less contentious word, dem’s da “rules” and they’re pretty basic. These are the same twits who really are likely to suddenly panic and swerve in as you eventually undertake with a sigh.

There are plenty of stretches of dual carriageway round here where it makes sense to stay in the outside lane for a good few miles – there are several slip roads joining the DC in a short stretch.

But everyone understands this – it’s the sensible thing to do unless you want to drive at 50, in which case you stay to the left and make up the inner row of traffic, allowing all the joining vehicles to merge.

Not quite sure why any of this is up for discussion tbh. Our imperfect traffic laws are mostly built around common sense and the idea that fair play will get everyone where they need to be as efficiently as possible. Anyone not following this ethos is a dangerous Cockwomble. There. You made me say it again.

Move to Australia if you hate driving in the UK. Drivers here are so much betterer.

I totally chilled TF out after returning from a holiday in Kuala Lumpur.

After 20 minutes in traffic there, I knew I’d never, ever, ever complain about driving standards here (I reserve the right to mumble into my beard on occasion).

anagallis_arvensis – Member
I wonder if many have accepted fixed penalty notices? Can you get a fpn for careless driving?

Yes, you can now (in Scotland anyway, and were usually behind when it comes to matters of law).

As we all know, overtaking on a blind bend and killing a cyclist by hitting her head-on is definitively NOT in any way illegal.

Exactly.

Even worse than middle lane drivers ( this morning at least), is the selfish f**Kw*t that parked right up to my bumper , leaving himself/herself enough room to drive away. C*** !!!!!!!.
and breathe……. 🙂

But only in “your book” which is an complete load of bollocks developed from watching too much Clarkson, reading the Mail and listening to your mate Dave down the Dog and Duck who say we’re all been overrun by them foreigners who drive on the wrong side of the road.
Show me the numbers that support your arguments please, were is this link between not moving left and some consequence worse than we know is caused by the actions you think are ok?

Now you’ve really lost it. Hopefully you’re just trolling, but, if you actually re-read what you’ve just written and still think it makes sense, then it’s possible the following old adage could have been a better option for you: “best stay quiet and have everyone else think you’re a fool, rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt”

<mod>
Getting a bit tetchy in here. Play nicely, ladies.
</mod>

So to be clead thegreatgape, you can get a fixed penalty for careless driving and a sign of careless driving could be undertaking?

The law seems pretty clear to me:

On all roads, undertaking is permitted if the vehicles in the lane to the right are queueing and slow moving

(rule 268): “Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake”. Undertaking is permitted in congested conditions when frequent lane changing is not recommended

Don’t do it except in the circumstances stated otherwise by default it is not legal. So if you change lane and undertake an isolated vehicle it’s illegal, but if you stay in the same lane and undertake a queue of slow moving vehicles it’s legal.

So if you change lane and undertake an isolated vehicle it’s illegal

And again; which law are you breaking?

THC is not law. Contravening THC is not illegal, unless it says you MUST or MUST NOT do something. Which it does quite often, but not in this case.

We’ve covered this repeatedly now, please read the thread.

“( this morning at least), is the selfish f**Kw*t that parked right up to my bumper , leaving himself/herself enough room to drive away. C*** !!!!!!!.”

fair game for black bumpers and a shove…… oh you have colour coded bumpers that mark – shame.

Rule 268 of the highway code isn’t one of the “must” rules but break it and you be found liable in court. Non respect of highway code rules immediately puts you into the “not exercising due care” citeria fro “careless driving” so even if you claim it’s not specifically illegal if you do it in the wrong circumstances you will get done for careless driving if you do it. To me that in a round about way makes it illegal.

There are lots of things that become illegal in certain circumstances and make you liable to prosecution. Buy a carving knife on the way home and you’re not breaking the law. Buy a carving knife on the way to a football match and when you get to the match you will be carrying an offensive weapon.

Passed on the left, Mr Spoon, passed on the left.

However you phrase it, it was utterly bizzare, after 2-3minutes I was completely parranoid that I was somehow in the hard shoulder, or had mised a ‘lane closed’ sign. Almost felt relieved when I eventualy caught up with a truck!

I’ll not claim to be an above average driver (without any evidence), but you have to wonder what on earth was going through the next lanes mind to make them not look arround them at the empty space and not think “I could go 20mph quicker in that lane”, yet some people will cut accross lanes in crawling traffic to make up 2 car lengths.

I remember a small article by Douglas Adams, written at a time when he spent his time half and half in the UK and US. Both countries have laws/rules/habits/precedents against ‘overtaking on the left’, and ‘parking against traffic’. The UK police generally don’t tend to care about parking against traffic and the US police generally don’t tend to care about undertaking.

Naturally Mr Adams managed to do both manouvers in the ‘wrong’ country in quickish succession, safely (he claimed), and lamented the arbitrary manner in which certain guidelines are picked up and applied as absolute law.

Regardless, in the UK undertaking is effectively utterly forbidden, unmarked police cars will cruise the middle lanes of quiet motorways at 65mph in order to dupe you into doing it, and traffic law is generally not subject the due process we should expect.

So I won’t be doing it.

(Much).

Klumpy has it. Putting aside whether it’s a ‘safe’ maneouvre or not in your particular circumstances, whatever the technicalities of illegality or legality, enforcement on the ground is what matters. Nearly all of the time the courts will back the judgement of traffic officers as to what constitutes driving without due care and attention, so for all practical purposes, passing on the left might as well be illegal under statute.

Deep down, 99.9% of drivers know what’s permissible and what isn’t, which is why you don’t tend see many people pulling undertakes on marked police cars.

I still do it occasionally if someone is oblivious to me sitting waiting to overtake. If an unmarked car pulled me for it, I wouldn’t moan about it though.

Rule 268 of the highway code isn’t one of the “must” rules but break it and you be found liable in court. Non respect of highway code rules immediately puts you into the “not exercising due care” citeria fro “careless driving” so even if you claim it’s not specifically illegal if you do it in the wrong circumstances you will get done for careless driving if you do it. To me that in a round about way makes it illegal.

See my comments above regarding the judge instructing the jury to ignore breaking a HC “should” in a recent trial for careless driving (where it was accepted that the driver broke the HC rule in question, and was found not guilty).

unmarked police cars will cruise the middle lanes of quiet motorways at 65mph in order to dupe you into doing it

BS

Nearly all of the time the courts will back the judgement of traffic officers as to what constitutes driving without due care and attention, so for all practical purposes, passing on the left might as well be illegal under statute.

Presumably it shouldn’t be hard to find a case of somebody being successfully prosecuted for it then…

Presumably it shouldn’t be hard to find a case of somebody being successfully prosecuted for it then…

The CPS seems to believe there is supporting case law. From their own charging guidance:

“There are decided cases that provide some guidance as to the driving that courts will regard as careless or inconsiderate and the following examples are typical of what we are likely to regard as careless driving:

overtaking on the inside;
driving inappropriately close to another vehicle;
inadvertently driving through a red light;
emerging from a side road into the path of another vehicle;
tuning a car radio; when the driver was avoidably distracted by this action;
using a hand-held mobile phone or other hand-held electronic equipment when the driver was avoidably distracted by that use (note that this is an offence itself under Regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2003). If this is the only relevant aspect of the case it is more appropriate to use the specific offence;
selecting and lighting a cigarette or similar when the driver was avoidably distracted by that use.”

The CPS seems to believe there is supporting case law.

I see nothing in what you’ve posted to support that assertion – certainly not for the sort of case we’re discussing where you overtake somebody on the left without changing lanes.

You missed my point about the circumstances dictating if the overtaking on the inside constitutes not exercising due care, Aracer. There’s a degree of subjectivity, the highway code rule includes a “Do not” that breaking is inviting a trip to court (you may or may not persuade the magistrate what you did was safe) and in the case of a collision potentially much worse. I used to drive a van with a nearside blind spot, vehicles have better mirrors these days but if you cause an accident by undertaking you’ll be the one at fault.

A quick Google reveals plenty of people moaning about getting a fine and points. This law blog was also thrown up. There was another site from a law firm stating undertaking is illegal whilst another, Stephensons, says legal but… don’t.

Looking for crashes caused by undertaking you’ll find plenty, one issued by the police and in the Telegraph.

I find it odd that on a forum where there is justified outrage when cyclists are injured or killed by drivers not respecting highway code “shoulds” anyone would argue in favour of overtaking on the inside. Would you ride down the inside of a bus on your bike? I hope not.

“We’re in the self-preservation society da da da daaaa…”

Having had a look – admittedly cursorily – I can’t find any case law specifically relating to ‘nearside overtake’, ‘careless undertake’ or similar terminology.

I suspect the reason is because, until only recently, police were unable to deal with careless driving by way of a Fixed Penalty Notice, meaning the allegation had to be heard in court. Therefore a straightforward ‘undertake’ (absent anything else careless / dangerous before or after the ‘undertake’) was presumably not in the interests of justice to take any further.

It makes me wonder though; who would now be more likely to be pulled over and given a FPN – the undertaker for undertaking, or the undertakee (?) for hugging the other lane?

There is though case law to support the undertaker if they are hit during the manoeuvre, as it was found that the defendant had been negligent in not looking properly before moving.

schnor – Member

It makes me wonder though; who would now be more likely to be pulled over and given a FPN – the undertaker for undertaking, or the undertakee (?) for hugging the other lane?

Somebody on pistonheads claimed to get done for doing something like this.

My understand is lanes 3, 4 and 5 were chockablock and doing about 65-70. OP was in lane 1 doing approx 70, went into L2 and overtook a truck in L1. Policeman in unmarked car in L3 pulled him over and IIRC issued ticket for due care for undertaking the traffic in L3.

I do this quite a lot myself and haven’t had any problems, I’m not going to sit in nose to tail slow moving traffic with the brake-dabbing-Audi-driving-big-swinging-bawbags when there are empty lanes on the left.

Read Schnor’s link everybody and make your own mind up about how much it had to do with the kind of undertaking the highway code advises against. It’s the kind of undertaking that is allowed and the other driver was doing a u-turn rather than just moving back in to an inside lane.

schnor’s (quite well known) case involved overtaking on the right, not the left, so I’m struggling to see the relevance.

You missed my point about the circumstances dictating if the overtaking on the inside constitutes not exercising due care

There’s something we agree on – therefore it is not in itself an offence.

the highway code rule includes a “Do not”

I don’t believe there is any more significance to that than “should” in legal terms.

I find it odd that on a forum where there is justified outrage when cyclists are injured or killed by drivers not respecting highway code “shoulds” anyone would argue in favour of overtaking on the inside.

Are you seriously suggesting that staying in the left lane to pass somebody who you’ve caught up who is hogging a lane to your right (when the lane you are in is clear) is legally, morally, or in any other way equivalent to running down a cyclist from behind, or whilst overtaking on a blind corner?

If its a quiet 3 lane motorway and someone is hogging lane 3 I wouldn’t even hesitate as I’d be in lane 1 anyway. I’d just sail past

What’s the alternative in that scenario.

Slow down to their speed?
Move across two lanes to get behind them?
Wait patiently?
Wait some more?
Give up and return to lane 1 but now stick to whatever speed the driver in lane 3 thinks is okay so you don’t undertake them?

That’s sound like madness.
I can’t imagine how under those circumstances you could possibly be prosecuted for just carrying on in lane 1 at the speed limit.

Now we know this isn’t how most “undetaking” happens. There’s lots of versions of it up to Mr F***wit in his Beamer weaving in and out of lanes like a maniac.

But the scenario above does happen, its happened to me and I’m pretty sure carrying on in lane 1 is actually the correct way to deal with it.

schnor’s (quite well known) case involved overtaking on the right, not the left, so I’m struggling to see the relevance.

It’s relevant because if you execute a manoeuvre carelessly and hit someone who could not have avoided the resulting collision then you are at fault, not the other party (who was in that case filtering).

Has it been used by someone who got taken out by a lane-hogger when undertaking? I’ve no idea. Could it? Absolutely; in case law the circumstances don’t have to be identical but close enough to make a convincing argument.

Edukator – Troll
the other driver was doing a u-turn rather than just moving back in to an inside lane changed lanes without looking.

Like what could happen if you undertake someone. Which is why I tend not to do it.

From your own link Schnor:

the claimant was able to overtake the stationary queue. The defendant decided to get out of the queue by executing a U-turn and going back the way he had come. As he emerged from the queue in the course of that U-turn there was a collision between his car, by now roughly broadside across the eastbound lane, and the claimant’s motorcycle

AA – yes to your first question, I don’t know to the second. Hard to say since we haven’t yet managed to conclusively define undertaking – carrying on as you already were in Lane 1 and passing on the left, or changing lanes expressly in order to pass on the left, or both? I still think the former is ok, and I do it, but that’s just a personal opinion.

Cougar – while many of the HC rules are not specifically legislated for, the HC as a whole is deemed a ‘Code of Practice’, and failure to comply with said CoP can be evidence of careless or dangerous driving. (That’s a fairly verbatim quote from my very distant memories of probationer training, so a) it could be out of date, and b) I’m just the messenger!)