unofficial policy regarding speeding

What is the source of these statistics?

Statistically what is the lane least likely to be involved in a fatal collision?

On my daily commute I seem to notice most shunts are in the outside two lanes but maybe these a minor collisions?

AJH

FSVO "nobody". And I hope you're not falling into the trap of believing that London is the UK? The M25 is one of the most congested roads in the country, hence the (rather effective) VSLs. Guy

Not on my watch they don't.

If I am able to travel at whatever speed I choose in the inside lane and I happen to pass someone sat dozily in the middle lane, so be it.

And they can flash their lights all they like, get out of the lane muppet!

I'd rather Plod started pulling these sorts rather than using terminology like "undertaking" and pointing the finger at those of us who are actually adhering to the Highway Code.

The people that "cruise" the middle lane usually don't have any clue about the likely overtaking ability of the car behind. They think if they pull over they will be boxed in by the overtaking car and lorry 1 mile ahead. That's what they do if anyone pulls over to nearside lane for them.

Its because all the impatient tossers herd there, a problem made worse by other tossers - such as yourself - hogging the middle lane and refusing to move to the inside lane even if there is no traffic in it for a mile ahead.

MattF

They should all be shot. Line 'em up and execute them in front of their families. (TM)

Fine, as long as dangerous driving is also detected and penalised on a more rigorous basis than today - driving too close, use of mobile phones, ...

Especially annoying when I come across a middle lane dawdler when I'm towing, becuase towing vehicles aren't allowed in lane 3.

just out of interest do police as a general rule take any action against middle-lane huggers cruisers hoggers hookers?

Do bear in mind that most speedo's over indicate speed by around 5 MPH at that sort of rate of knots....

The law

It's 70 and that's it - no benefit of the doubt for 10% over.

The interpretation

The reality

Most speedo's over-read a bit, especially when the car is new or a Ford, so someone driving at 80 on the clock is unlikely to be doing more than 75mph.

Some police forces enforce more strictly (e.g. in north Wales and Cumbria (3 cameras set up on the bridge to welcome you as you enter)), but most don't bother unless you are over 80 and / or being silly (undertaking, weaving, carving up, following too closely etc.).

Most forces used to prosecute for over 90 to get more points, although this may be automatic now, and once you get to 100 the courts will be considering a ban.

Indeed and I'd like the law changed so undertaking is allowed.

IME there are three ways round that:

When I was a lot younger, I did 1 and 2 but, even then, soon realised that a particular road I used was much too stressful for my long term health. After a neighbour had a bad stroke and his wife single mindedly blamed that road, I moved house to avoid it. Now I'm much more relaxed.

Fundamentally, lane hoggers are an unhealthy mix of stupid, selfish and ignorant types incapable of responding correctly to the ever changing conditions around them.

No need - it is not, and never has been illegal.

That's a technicality that doesn't seem to apply in practice because of the following excerpts:

Highway Code Introduction: ..."Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see 'The road user and the law') to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ?should/should not? or ?do/do not?."...

Highway Code rule 268 "Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake."...

..and from a fake cop.. "You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

Ok..I'll re-phrase..I'd like the Highway Code changed so undertaking is allowed.

I think that the idea that you should only move out of the inner lane for overtaking is old boll***. OK it applies to fairly empty motorways. But the four lanes on M25 are there for the capacity. Naturally, the vehicles spread out over the four lanes; each lane runs at its own speed, getting faster when you move outwards. That's efficient use of the capacity. Look how motorways clog up when there is only one lane available, e.g. roadwork or stranded vehicles. I like the 70-75mph speed for the economy; that's lane 3. Others wants to go faster or slower, so they move to the appropriate lane.

In message , johannes writes

Unfortunately, it is the rule of the road.

But different drivers have different ideas about what 'empty' means. Even when Lane 1 is essentially completely empty, many drivers will immediately select Lane 2 on the basis that they 'may' encounter some slower traffic in Lane 1.

No. Each lane runs at what the guy at the head of the queue decides is 'the natural speed for that lane'. Lane 4 often moves no faster - or even slower - than Lanes 2 and 3 (and sometimes Lane 1 too).

No it doesn't. When things are congested, the 'lower order' lanes often run faster then the 'higher order' lanes. This is usually because some drivers are determined not the use the 'lower order' lanes.

But it doesn't often happen.

BTW, did you know the Pope's a Catholic?

So do I. Unfortunately, a lot of drivers seem hell-bent on preventing me from doing so!

But, unfortunately, they don't. The 'appropriate lane' should not be determined by what speed you want to travel at, but instead by the amount of congestion/obstruction you are experiencing in the 'lesser order' lanes.

But that's what happens in practice. In reality, it's also the best use of the motorway's four lane capacity. Why would anyone pull in when it immediately impedes the speed of progress? However, I'm describing a situation of near optimal capacity, e.g. 7 am before there is serious congestion. Congestion is another matter, and you're quite right that the fast lane often becomes the slowest, as greedy motorists congregate towards the fast lane. I normally stay away from the fast lane because the cars there are driving far too close. I have seen so many three car pile ups in the fast lane over the years. Fast lane - no thanks. However, I do use the fast lane sometimes, but only for short bursts of overtaking.

In message , johannes writes

What happens in practice happens because a certain proportion of drivers choose their lane on the basis of their desired speed, regardless of the actual traffic conditions and prevailing lane occupancy.

Unfortunately, this often has exactly the opposite result to what was intended. A lot of congestion is caused by drivers inappropriately occupying the 'higher order' lanes.

The problem is that many drivers simply won't 'pull in' just IN CASE it their progress gets impeded. As a result, they themselves impede others who want to overtake them. Personally (and within reason), I'm quite happy to 'pull in' if it means that I won't be delaying others.

Motorways don't have a 'fast lane'.