[Closed] Pulled over for my actions after driver that pulled out on me from a slip road..

Where in the law does it say should help?

As I understand you must be prepared to come to a stop OR continue onto the hardshoulder if not safe?

OR - use your brain and adjust your speed to filter in BEHIND rather than beat or force another driver to put him/herself into the path of another car in the middle lane.

I bet a lorry driver would swear alot on this subject...

Only I am pretty sure I never indicated back in.

You don't have to indicate left unless you are leaving the motorway or you are changing lanes sooner than you should (eg emergency vehicle is approaching from behind and you need to re-enter lane 1/2 before being able to view the car you've just overtaken in your rear view). This still doesn't give anybody the right to cut people up though!

My understanding is you don't indicate into a left hand lane as that's where you should be dependent on traffic, not hogging the middle lane.

I think motorway lessons should be compulsory after you've passed the driving test.

My understanding is you don't indicate into a left hand lane as that's where you should be dependent on traffic, not hogging the middle lane.

If you altering your course you need to tell other drivers, it doesn't matter that you think you should be in that lane they need to know your intentions.

Hora - the reality is that there often isn't an easy gap available on busy dual carriageways and motorways, and if you come to a stop on the slip (or there isn't a hard shoulder), that difficulty and the risk of a braking wave or crash is magnified greatly.

Bit of give and take is all that is needed, regardless of rights of way. OP was right and considerate to move over, and a bit careless perhaps coming back again. It's the sort of thing that happens frequently at peak times.

Truth is probably that the copper pulled him because he was embarrassed at having to brake sharply due to his own inattention/lack of braking distance, and needed someone else to blame.

I suppose a lot of it is common courtesy but you don't /have/ to pull out and allow them to filter in.

Sounds like the other driver then abused the situation if, as you say, he booted it and went to full beam (or appeared to, if the boot lowered and bonnet lifted - may be just poor headlights).

I think there's no obligation to indicate to pull back in, again just common courtesy - could be wrong on that. However, if you cut in, sounds like he was accelerating to beyond your speed, which is where filtering breaks down...

I think there's no obligation to indicate to pull back in, again just common courtesy - could be wrong on that.

Yeah you're wrong.

Multi-lane carriageways (133 to 143)
Lane discipline
133
If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and if necessary take a quick sideways glance to make sure you will not force another road user to change course or speed. When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other road users and when clear, move over

Yup Motorway lessons should maybe be compulsory then.

...too much of a rush.

[b]martinxyz[/b] - No rush at all,scroll back and read. I was going 60/65mph in front of a cop for approx 4 miles.

Don't confuse "rush" with speed.

Come to think of it, the cops that had to brake after following the guy that booted it up to 65-70mph to pull in front of myself and the cop van behind.. why did the police not pull over into the 2nd lane? Why were they driving so close for this to become a problem for them?

Look from his perspective: He's accelerating to join the road, you move over (how kind and sensible) so he takes "your" spot in front of the copper (for this to be a safe distance he'd need to get himself as far in front of them as you initially were)

... but then you move back in - to the space he's attempting to occupy. All without any indication.

During the bike test/lessons, I was put in my place. It was described as a junction. I was asked what you should do at junctions..

Moving over when you can (or already being out there if you know it's a short slip) isn't just courtesy; it's safety and efficiency

(drac) If you altering your course you need to tell other drivers, it doesn't matter that you think you should be in that lane they need to know your intentions

Drac - Moderator

If you altering your course you need to tell other drivers, it doesn't matter that you think you should be in that lane they need to know your intentions.

While this is in the highway code, I am pretty sure that at 'higher' levels of driving, this is not taught as always required.
I used to frequent the Parkers forum (which doesn't exist anymore) and had regular 'discussions' with an ex-traffic Police blokie who was a high level instructor for the IAM. I can't rememebr all his credentials, but basically if you could do a course on it for driving, he had done it, bought the t-shirt and taught others how to do it.

He regularly used to say that indicating in certain situations wasn't necessary; it should only be used if it is was of direct benefit to other road users and used to cite specifically pulling in after overtaking people as a situation where he wouldn't indicate. I used to argue at length with him about it, but he was adamant it was 'roadcraft' etc.

Sometimes I do think that indicating can make people do as the OP describes; accelerate to close a gap as they don't want you 'getting in front' or 'filling their space' or some other nonsense.

Having read through this thread yesterday, I was a bit more observant about slip road shenanigans on the way into work this morning. One thing that I have previously thought is an issue, I saw lots of today; people driving too close to each other, particularly on the slip lane. They all bomb down the lane in a big train with no room for manoeuvre. If you are on the inside of the main carriageway and there are cars coming down your outside, this can leave you with having to force a gap in the cars by maintaining your position and letting one of them slow to slot in behind you (which automatically slows all the cars behind them too) or come to a virtual stop on the carriageway to let the whole lot in. One junction today, there must have been 10 cars all steaming down a slip road with less than a cars length between them, which if you are forced to stay in the inside lane due to traffic overtaking on the outside doesn't give you too many options.
I think a lot of it comes down to anticipation and people not thinking further than the end of the bonnet.

Pulling out into the outside lane on the approach to slip roads can sometimes work, but some roads have so many slip roads you would spend more time in the outside lane letting people join the carriageway than you would on the inside lane.

Oh, one more thing....(for the moment 🙂 ). I think in other European countries, the onus is on the people on the main carriageway to move out of the way and the people on the slip road have priority. An old colleague of mine is Polish and came in ranting one day about someone not moving out of his way to let him join the A14. After finding out a bit more, it turns out he was of the impression that he had right of way as he was joining the main carriageway, which he said was how it works in Poland. So, perhaps this is more prevalent where there are large numbers of European immigrants who are familiar with different traffic rules?

Fair point Drac, I was possibly thinking of single lane overtake and return manoeuvre - when the default is to return.

Regular re-test for all? not a bad idea. I could do with a re-test I'm sure.

[i]I think there's no obligation to indicate to pull back in[/I]

Comments like this worry me but explain a lot about the quality of driving on our roads. Surely if you are changing lane then you indicate? Why wouldn't you want those around you to know what you are doing?

I did say I wasn't sure about that - which got edited out in your quote. Also I was trying to emphasise the obligation bit - i.e. if you are in lane 1, doing 55 mph, and I pass at say 70 mph, no other cars about, and then about 200 yards or more I move into lane 1 - it's kind of obvious what my intentions are.

However.

While this is in the highway code, I am pretty sure that at 'higher' levels of driving, this is not taught as always required.

Certainly was for me.

I don't think anyone fails to accept that the other guy was doing something wrong by barging into the first lane and then "booting it" to undertake the OP. None of that is what is at issue here.

The problem is that the OP cut back in front of the other guy, without indicating, and close enough that Dibble thought it was worth pulling the OP over to offer words of advice about it.

So the other guy shouldn't have been where he was, accelerating to undertake? I'd rather let him go on his merry way than have an accident, regardless of who ends up being judged at fault for it.

I think part of the problem, OP, is that you seem to treat your journey as some sort of endurance race, with your talk of "going backwards on your journey" and such concern at the prospect of possibly 'losing' half a dozen places in the line of traffic - which will make absolutely no difference to your journey time - and your attitude that that space in the line of traffic was somehow yours because it was where you were positioned previously doesn't help.

You say that you did look and thought there was sufficient room to pull back in - you got this wrong though. That can happen (I'm sure it's happened to all of us that drive at some point), particularly if the other guy "booted it" but in this case, you compounded the problem by pulling back into lane 1 without indicating - if you had indicated first at least the other guy would have known what you intended to do and might have modified his driving (i.e. easing off on the right foot) accordingly, instead of which the first he knew about it was your rear bumper coming across in front of him as he accelerated.

Your driving, as described by yourself, was poor, and dangerous, and your attitude to sharing road space with other users is wrong headed. The fact that someone else did something(s) wrong does not negate any of that.

The point of a sliproad is to get joining traffic up to a speed where it can safely MERGE with existing traffic, not to allow cars to reach it's end, slow or stop while looking for a space and then have to accelerate again

It states that you slow at the start of the slip road and then use the slip road to get up the speed before making the move. Not hammer along it,indicate and then fire out.

The 3rd sliproad/junction after this heading south on the A9 has a sliproad not long after it which I need to turn off left to get home after work. If I pull out to let the traffic coming from the Nairn road into the left lane at peak times, then it can often mean not being able to get back into the left lane to filter off it seconds later. So this is another example of why I'm not keen on moving out of the lane I'm needing to be in.

Jeez...wtf is wrong with people?

"I don't have to indicate..."

"...higher levels of driving..."

It's no wonder we have so many pissed off drivers on the road if applying a little pressure to a stalk a few inches away from your hand to tell everyone else what you're doing is too much trouble. As I said before, driving on crowded roads is not an activity to be practised in your own bubble. Your intentions and subsequent actions have effects on the safety of others around you, as do theirs on yours. Is it really too much trouble to let everyone know what you're up to on the road?

Comments like this worry me but explain a lot about the quality of driving on our roads. Surely if you are changing lane then you indicate? Why wouldn't you want those around you to know what you are doing?

The correct lane for driving is the nearside one unless ovetaking. Once you have indicated and overtaken, the slower vehicle/obstruction, the only place you should be going is back into the nearside lane and why an indication isnt needed. Real world multiple lane driving isnt exactly like this with middle lane hoggers etc but that shouldnt take away from good driving.

Ah right, so it's Mirror, Signal, Manoeuvre for overtaking, but just Mirror, Manoeuvre for pulling back in. 🙂

the only place you should be going is back into the nearside lane and why an indication isnt needed

That is a very worrying point of view.

deadlydarcy - Member
Jeez...wtf is wrong with people?

Just confirming what dear late father said to me, and what I pass on to my kids...."[b]assume [/b]everyone else on the road is an idiot."

Where in the law does it say should help?

As I understand you must be prepared to come to a stop OR continue onto the hardshoulder if not safe?

OR - use your brain and adjust your speed to filter in BEHIND rather than beat or force another driver to put him/herself into the path of another car in the middle lane.

Attitudes like this and the OP really sadden me. It's a crowded Island, parts of it are very crowded, if we all tried a bit harder to accommodate each other it would be a much more pleasant place to be. Too many people with the "it's my right of way" point of view.

Indicators too, why does it matter if you should or shouldn't? It helps other people out JFDI.

*sighs*

These people are taking over.

thisthread reminds me of 2 incidents this morning when i had to drive in ...

1 goingover a cross roads - the guy behind me has initiated his overtake while we are both still crossing the crossroads - just about wipes out the car coming towards us and forcing me to brake on the road we are crossing - hard.

2. sitting in traffic entering dyce - car behind was rolling slow in the traffic - we are talking 20 minute tail backs here. there was a gap - transit van actually pulls out and over takes the slow rolling car to gain precisely 0 seconds and trying to park his transit on my towbar/spare tire

people need to slow the **** down

to brian regans pop tart routine "if you need to wake up and be out the door hauling ass in 3 seconds you need to sort your prioritys in life out"

To be fair to the OP. It wasn't a motorway it was the A9 near Inverness. And its not really a slip road.

Having said that checking its safe to change lanes isn't optional

OP I wonder whether you really should be on the roads?
How long have you been driving?
Do you really think the police pulled you over for no good reason?

Its all pretty simple really. You see a car pulling looking to pull on to a dual carriageway. You assess whether you can move into the other lane to enable this. If you can you do. If you can't you immediately prepare for the driver potentially pulling out anyway. If they can safely join and you can facilitate this by safely slowing slightly then do. The road isn't a place to assert your rights its a means of getting from A to B safely. Don't think it's too difficult.

[i]The correct lane for driving is the nearside one unless ovetaking. Once you have indicated and overtaken, the slower vehicle/obstruction, the only place you should be going is back into the nearside lane and why an indication isnt needed.[/i]

Mirror, SIGNAL, manoeuvre. Is it really that difficult?

[i] Is it really that difficult?[/i]

Drive somewhere for 10 minutes - you'll find that it definitely IS for many many people.

Seems to be a difference of opinion at the moment between those that have passed the driving test and those who have took further training.

I've passed 7 driving tests from basic DSA as a 17 year old to advanced and DSA fleet and the advanced test require a signal when there is someone to benifit not just as part of the MSM routine.

So, during advanced driving, approaching a completely open roundabout intending to go right if there is no one around don't signal. If anyone appears signal. The idea is that the driver keeps their observations high as they are constantly looking for other road users.

On a basic DSA test this kind of driving would be classed as a fail. The basic test is proactive rather than reactive.

So, in my opinion the OP should have indicated back over, especially if he realised the other vehicle was being a clown by accelerating.

This type of behavior of accelerating when other vehicles are overtaking is becoming more widespread and there was a thread not long ago about drivers not wanting to go into lane 3 then accelerating when lane 2 becomes clear leaving overtaking vehicles stranded.

In this case I think it six of one and half a dozen of the other, both parties could have handled it better.

[i]Drive somewhere for 10 minutes - you'll find that it definitely IS for many many people. [/i]

I drive in Milton Keynes every day, I know how many people feel that indicating is not part of modern driving. The one that drives me mental is people not indicating left on roundabouts. It's not difficult, it really isn't.

what possible reason could there be NOT to indicate - do they think it saves fuel or something ?

even if no one is there it does absolutely no harm to indicate - what if no ones there , but during your manuver someone approaches - they have no idea of your intentions.

indicators or no indicators - you should be looking out for other car drivers anyway - a flashing light does not change this - and even if a light is flashing - remember its an indication they may do something - not that they will do something - the only thing its safe to assume is that the bulb isnt blown.

Mirror, SIGNAL, manoeuvre. Is it really that difficult?

Indicators too, why does it matter if you should or shouldn't? It helps other people out JFDI.

Doesn't necessarily help though - you have to consider why indication is made. As has been said, if you're 100 yards ahead of me and pulling away, I don't need to know that you're moving into my lane and in 5 seconds you'll be 150 yards ahead but in the same lane. If there's nobody ahead of you either, then there's nobody who'll be helped by your indication. You [i][b]could[/b][/i] even argue that superfluous information can only distract other driverss (if it achieves anything)

"Always indicate" is a passable default for people who can't make sensible decisions but don't imagine that it's always better. We'd be better off explaining to those people why they need to indicate and for whose benefit it's done
That might even educate those people who think that merely indicating gives them carte blanche to make whatever manoeuvre they fancy or, even better, those who start to indicate whilst (or even after 😀 😯 ) they start to move

that's always one that bothered me t_r to be honest.

And I'm in agreement with you - just doesn't feel right to not indicate if that makes ensue.

I think it's the IAM approach (and possibly police driver school). However - it's all very well to say "no folk around, no need to indicate" - but what if there's someone that you haven't seen? I think it's intention (may be wrong, again!) is to get away from sloppy indicating without the mirror (or look) and manoeuvre stuff, but I'd be inclined to still indicate 'just in case' .

now your making shit up SP

maybe defensive driving courses teach different to the IAM

Which bit of shit did you think was made up ? 😀

"Always indicate" is a passable default for people who can't make sensible decisions but don't imagine that it's always better.

I think we could re-phrase that...

So, during advanced driving, approaching a completely open roundabout intending to go right if there is no one around don't signal.

I was taught it's not necessary but if you feel the need to do so then that's fine. I certainly wasn't taught there is no need to signal when their is traffic around even a 100 yards away.

DD - how about "I'm cleverer than all of you and I drive almost as well as [b]'him'[/b] "

I can't believe some the attitudes towards driving here.

Acceleration lanes are there to help drivers MERGE safely onto a motorway or dual carriageway.
A single dashed line at the side of a road shows an access, this could be for a parking space side road or 'slip road' either on or off.
If there is space in the right hand lane when someone is trying to merge you should move over, not because you have to or because it is common courtesy but because it is the safest thing to do. Also when you pull back into the left hand lane you should look around you and see what is the safest way of pulling back in, this may involve waiting a few seconds.
As for indicating, if there are people around indicate so they can see what you are planning to do. Even if you going faster than them how do you know that you won't suddenly need to brake hard once you have pulled back in. Also you should indicate for pedestrians and cyclists benefits too.

Too many people think they are some driving god just because they have ABS. I'm not the best driver in the world, pretty normal in terms of speed and stuff, but I've been driving for 20 years and I've never had any points and only ever had one very minor slow speed crash, which was my fault.

If there is space in the right hand lane when someone is trying to merge you should move over, not because you have to or because it is common courtesy but because it is the safest thing to do. Also when you pull back into the left hand lane you should look around you and see what is the safest way of pulling back in, this may involve waiting a few seconds.

Also you should indicate for pedestrians and cyclists benefits too.

As for indicating, if there are people around indicate so they can see what you are planning to do. Even if you going faster than them how do you know that you won't suddenly need to brake hard once you have pulled back in

Much more likely IMO - if we're on urban duallies now, how does the following driver know that your indication means that you're only pulling back in and not that you're about to slow right down and pull into your drive ? If they thought the latter, they'd need to get ready either to brake or change lane which would be unnecessarily altering their behaviour on the road

"how does the following driver know that your indication means that you're only pulling back in and not that you're about to slow right down "

because our roads are now in such a state that people dont look beyond the end of the bonnet - you should have been in the LH lane a long time ago if your turning into your drive and you certainly shouldnt be indicating that manuver from the outside lane.

Indicating.. I can think of one scenario where not indicating is the best choice for all concerned, because it happened to me a few weeks ago:

I'm travelling along a (national speed limit) dual carriageway. The road is quiet, I'm in the first (left) lane of two, doing something close to the speed limit (say, 65 mph).

There's a roundabout coming up, and I'll be turning right. Looking in my mirrors, there's a car in lane 2 (fast lane, overtaking lane, call it what you will), gaining ground on me fairly fast. Given my speed, and the way he's gaining ground on me, he's speeding, maybe doing 80, maybe 90. There's plenty of time / distance before the roundabout, and he'll catch up with me, at current speeds, before then. I have two choices now, given that I want to be in the right hand lane to turn right at the roundabout, and I want to make that lane change in the next few hundred yards if possible:

1) Indicate right. I don't know whether the guy in lane two, when he sees this, will slow down so I can change lanes in front of him, speed up (or maintain current speed) to get past me before I complete the manoeuvre. Similarly, the other guy seeing my indicator, won't know whether I've seen him and intend to change lanes after he passes me, or has seen him but intends to pull out anyway (being arsey because he;s speeding, or just because some people drive like that), or hasn't seen him and may change lanes at any moment. In this situation you can end up getting ever closer to the roundabout with both of us slowing in our respective lanes, unsure about the intentions of the other guy. He flashes his headlights, is that to say "come on out" or "I'm here, don't pull out in front of me"? I don't know...

2) Hold off on the indicator, let Captain Speedy sail past, then (indicate and) change lanes once he's past me. He goes on his merry way without having to second guess my plans, I'm able to complete my manoeuvre without worrying about what he's going to do, everyone's happy.

I went for option (2). Admittedly there was no other traffic about, and it might not be so clear cut a decision if there was loads of traffic.

So, yes, there are times when NOT indicating might be the best course of action, but when, like the OP, you're pulling back into lane 1 from lane 2, in traffic, with someone who's just joined accelerating in lane 1 just behind isn't one of them.

how does the following driver know that your indication means that you're only pulling back in and not that you're about to slow right down

Is that a serious question?

you should have been in the LH lane a long time ago if your turning into your drive and you certainly shouldnt be indicating that manuver from the outside lane.

teamhurtmore - Member
Just confirming what dear late father said to me, and what I pass on to my kids...."assume everyone else on the road is an idiot."

When STW is good, it's very very good.

When it's not, it's this.

I take it we're not talking motorways/dc any more ?

Don't you get pedestrians and cycles on dual carriageway where you drive?

Drac, the serious question is - If I see a car overtake me and when well ahead of me change lanes to the inside, I think "that car's finished it's overtake". How would it have helped me if it had indicated first ?
(at the very least I'd think that any indication may be for somebody else's benefit - but I can't see them and that might make me start to wonder who/where they are. How does that aid my concentration ?)

If I see a car overtake me and when well ahead of me change lanes to the inside, I think "that car's finished it's overtake". How would it have helped me if it had indicated first ?

Because you knew before it made it's move what it was going to do as it signalled. This would allow you to think right that car is going to move in, is it going to cause me a hazard and do I need to do anything. Pretty simple really.

Don't you get pedestrians and cycles on dual carriageway where you drive?

If we're on a non-urban 60+ mph DC with defined entry and exit slips (like the one in the OP) I don't see how my indication would help a pedestrian - If they see me, they'll not be on the road at all, whether or not I'm indicating. If they don't see me, indicating is of no help either.
If there's a bike then we have to assume I'm ahead of it (unless it's one of the [b]very[/b] few that use mirrors). If that's the case then we're back to me being faster than it and already being safely ahead (unless I've dangerously cut him up) so indication is of no use to him there either

that might make me start to wonder who/where they are.

If you're as awesomely observant as you're [s]trolling[/s] making yourself out to be, you'd be aware of who else is around and realise that he's just signalling his intention to move to the left.

If there's a bike then we have to assume I'm ahead of it (unless it's one of the very few that use mirrors).

I have a head that pivots.

When STW is good, it's very very good.

When it's not, it's this

hmmm - can we make a photoshop challenge out of this then I wonder...

Drac, the serious question is - If I see a car overtake me and when well ahead of me change lanes to the inside, I think "that car's finished it's overtake". How would it have helped me if it had indicated first ?
(at the very least I'd think that any indication may be for somebody else's benefit - but I can't see them and that might make me start to wonder who/where they are. How does that aid my concentration ?)

Or you could think, "now theres a courteous road user who like to tell people what he's intending to do"

Obviously on an empty motorway where you are doing 60 and he's doing 80 things might be different but in normal traffic it nice to let people know that you're pulling back in.

This would allow you to think right that car is going to move in, is it going to cause me a hazard and do I need to do anything

Also pretty simple really.

It's not though is it? You're describing increasingly specific events that may or may not benefit indicating. Keep going. The sub-set will keep decreasing in size...down to you being bewildered behind the wheel about who other than you might be the receiver of the other driver's indication. And if you're that bewildered, that easily, then should you be there at all?

I have a head that pivots.

edlong - what you did there was follow MSM.

that is you checked your mirrors - is it safe to manuver - oh no its not ill wait.

then once it was clear in your mirrors - you signaled and you manuvered.

signaling doesnt absolve you of all right to check the way is clear - nor does signalling mean speedy fred must slow down to allow you to move into his path.

and on a 60+ DC, have you ever looked back, seen a car indicating and taken some kind of action when you wouldn't have done so had the car NOT been indicating

Well it would mean I was aware that it was now moving into the lane I was in or intending to do so would have to be more cautious.

Blimey....some bored people on this thread!

Don't you have any work to do?? 😐

I generally go for "if I can see another road user, indicate, if not, then maybe I don't need to". If it's a big RAB where I'm turning right then there might be someone on the other side of the RAB who I can't see yet, so when I get to where I can see them, the indicator will be useful. Likewise, someone might approach a junction and be unsure as to my intentions because I'm not indicating.

As for edlong's example of when it's better NOT to indicate....

[i]He still indicated[/i]. Did exactly what I would do tbh, but still indicated. It's just using the indicator at a sensible time, by anticipating, being aware of what is going on around the car, then doing mirror-[b]signal[/b]-manouvre when safe.

Edit:

and on a 60+ DC, have you ever looked back, seen a car indicating and taken some kind of action when you wouldn't have done so had the car NOT been indicating

Yes, at least twice. I'm in lane 3, just passed a car in lane 2. I check my mirrors, look over my left shoulder as I'm about to put my indicator on. I see a pickup/lorry level with me in lane 1 start to indicate, it then obviously moves out to lane 2. If it hadn't indicated/I hadn't looked to the left then we would have been going for the same bit of road at the same time.

Not that this is relevant to the OP. He seemed to be punishing the other driver for what he'd done. That's not his job. Cutting people up, with or without indicating, is daft, whether you're teaching them a lesson for 'not driving properly' or not.

Don't you have any work to do??

No, don't you?

Don't you have any work to do??

I'm on holiday this week but just about to pop out and get some bits for the shepherds pie.

DD, I think my position has been consistent and was initially in response to people suggesting that ALL manoeuvres MUST be indicated, but then people began presenting ME with increasingly specific events:

I tend not to indicate back in if I'm going into the left lane and moving faster than the vehicle I've overtaken. I don't slam my way in just after passing, so they don't need to know what I'm intending to do - I'm ahead of them and moving away so they are in no danger of needing to react to my action. If I'm merging into traffic moving at the same speed as me then of course I'd have to

Doesn't necessarily help though - you have to consider why indication is made. As has been said, if you're 100 yards ahead of me and pulling away, I don't need to know that you're moving into my lane and in 5 seconds you'll be 150 yards ahead but in the same lane. If there's nobody ahead of you either, then there's nobody who'll be helped by your indication. You [b]could[/b] even argue that superfluous information can only distract other drivers (if it achieves anything)

I stand by both the above - what do you think is wrong with them ?

Well it [b][u]would[/u][/b] mean I was aware that it was now moving into the lane I was in or intending to do so [b][u]would[/u][/b] have to be more cautious.

So this hasn't happened ?

I can't recall every incident I've encountered on the roads.

Any one'll do 😀

I stand by both the above - what do you think is wrong with them ?

Well, they're quite specific and far removed from the realities of most folks' driving on crowded rush-two-hour DC/MWays and seemed to be created by you to support the patronising comment that indicating by default was for those who aren't aware of what's going on around them. Also, you ought to be checking your rear view mirror a bit more than "rarely", even when it's quiet.

EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that we could all make up specific situations where indication isn't [i]absolutely[/i] necessary - I can think right now of a few situations where I might not bother indicating myself, but given the general level of indicating I see on the motorway these days, I'd [i]rather[/i] everyone indicated by default when it's busy rather than not bothering convinced of and by their own awesomeness (present company excepted of course), that everybody else can guess what they're up to.

so I'd use the visual cues of the actual movement of the vehicle

I use both movement and indications.

I could make up an example to try and justify it if you like but either way indicators are their to show your intensions to other roads uses as of yet no one can read minds.

- even hypothetically; if you were that worried I assume you'd want to continue watching this suspect car closely so you're then riding along a DC for 10-15 seconds while looking over your shoulder waiting to see if it does something dodgy ?

I could make up an example to try and justify it if you like but either way indicators are their to show your intensions to other roads uses as of yet no one can read minds.

Yeh, all I'm saying is that it's not always necessary to show your intentions

Can you demonstrate an example where it is discourteous or unsafe to do so?

DD:

those people who think that merely indicating gives them carte blanche to make whatever manoeuvre they fancy or, even better, those who start to indicate whilst (or even after ) they start to move

- or you can have my slighly hypothetical / tongue in cheek (i did acknowledge that when I posted it initially) offering of superfluous information never being useful and just possibly distracting

it's actually the manoeuvre that's discourteous

The salient part of the sentence. Therefore, indicating in this case isn't unsafe or discourteous. In fact, at least it would give you an idea of what a stupid manoeuvre (why does it take me two or three attempts to type that bloody word?!?) the arsehole in question is about to execute. 🙂

superfluous information

There's also a hypothetical argument that information relating to an event or action happening close to you is never superfluous (but I'd concede we'd be heading down a philospohical argument there, and we've already digressed from the frankly PISS-BOILING ACTIONS of the OP that have made me want to leave my darkened bedroom and KILL someone. 😀 )

- or you can have my slighly hypothetical / tongue in cheek (i did acknowledge that when I posted it initially) offering of superfluous information never being useful and just possibly distracting

You're in the middle of a group of three cars driving along a quiet Mway in lane 1. Mr Driving God is 'making progress', on a 'determined drive' or whatever he wants to call it in lane 1 behind you. He indicates, moves out to lane 2. He passes you, indicates left when he's at least a couple of seconds ahead of you and the car ahead of you. Then moves left into lane 1.

How on earth is that confusing, dangerous or discourteous?! It might not be a lifesaving use of the indicators (like a left turning lorry), but (unlike on a bike) it's absolutely no effort or risk to indicate, so why not follow the highway code, MSM, show what you're doing? Just say "I CBA sometimes, so I don't bother when I don't bother when I think I can get away with it". Stop dressing it up as some kind of superior driving skill.

You're in the middle of a group of three cars driving along a quiet Mway in lane 1. Mr Driving God is 'making progress', on a 'determined drive' or whatever he wants to call it in lane 1 behind you. He indicates, moves out to lane 2. He passes you, indicates left when he's at least a couple of seconds ahead of you and the car ahead of you. Then moves left into lane 1.

How on earth does that confer clarity, safety or courtesy ?! Stop dressing it up as if it did.

If you do it when there's no need, are you still an arse if you begin the manoeuvre without waiting long enough for everyone to see the indication first and plan ahead ?

(I'm just about to go for a poo - I know you didn't need to know, but, y'know ...)

Oh, and Darcy - That's close to you. Oh yes; so very, very close !! 💡 <-- and that's a goatse just for you )

I do so love a good driving thread, there's almost as much ignorant bobbins spouted as there is on religion threads. Let's deal with this indication business first.

New drivers are taught that they must [b]always [/b]signal before a manoeuvre. We all remember mirror-signal-manoeuvre, yes? The reasons for this are many and should be obvious; you're learning a new skill and trying to develop automatic responses, your observation might not be up to snuff yet, you need the process to be as simple as possible so it's easier to learn, and so on.

(Based on personal experience) in further training, you're taught that this isn't always necessary. As an "advanced" driver, you're expected to make more complicated decisions and take more into account rather than just follow the basics by rote. For example, in order to pass the basic driving test, you need to be able to choose the correct lane; with advanced driving techniques you're encouraged to think about whereabouts in that lane you're supposed to be, moving around within that lane to gain a better vantage point on the road ahead (eg, moving left on a right-hand bend to see further round).

As you improve your driving, you're expected to be capable of assessing when indication isn't necessary. I'm not wholly sure personally what this gains other than "you don't need to so why would you?" but that's what's taught. Nonetheless, I fail to see why this is even worthy of argument; side A says there's no point in doing it, side B says there's nothing gained by not doing it so you might as well, the fact of the matter is that it [i]simply doesn't make a fig of difference either way.[/i] Both sides are correct, you might as well be arguing about which colour of charging cable you should use for an iPhone as you were told to always use white ones. Daft.

lets refer back to the OP - should he have indicated - even if he is magical mystery driver trained.

No, he shouldn't have indicated

your right - had he checked his mirror - he would have noted there was a car advancing and would be occupying the space he wanted to occupy if he manovered.

there's nothing on my right - it's safe for me to pull out 😉

In the specific case of the OP, I'd say he should have indicated.

Under normal circumstances, yes, he shouldn't have indicated. Or, rather, there'd be no point in him indicating so it doesn't really matter whether he does or not. In this specific situation, where he's planning on moving in front of a vehicle moving faster than he is (which I'll get to in a bit), he should have indicated IMO. It's an atypical situation.

One of them tells me that I was 'millimeters' from the front of the guys car when I pulled back in

Well there you go, in the opinion of the Police you were driving very dangerously, regardless of the right of wrongs of what the other driver did.