At last, it's the end of Middle lane hoggers and for anyone that splashes through a puddles getting passers by wet.

Whether it will policed enough we will soon see but it's about time people start learning how to drive and in the correct lane.

Brilliant, I have noticed that middlelane hoggers are all the same people - they sit 3" from the wheel and always look terrified

Brilliant, I have noticed that middlelane hoggers are all the same people - they sit 3" from the wheel and always look terrified

Well they will be even more terrified now with the prospect of a fine!

Even more terrified that I've flashed them, I remember lip reading a woman who was speaking to her partner "someone just flashed me"

Yes love get out the !Removed! middle lane your doing 60 in the 2nd lane of a 4 lane motorway gggrrrrrrrr

should be points on licence as well

Driving from Nottingham to Birmingham just now I still got stuck behind lane hogger after lane hogger.

Typically, they was all v-oap's so all I could see is 8 knuckles firmly gripping the wheel and some white fluffy hair. Either them or middle aged women. Oh and lorrys obviously.

All of em sat hogging the outside lane doing 50-60 leaving the inside lane clear for miles ahead.

Come up behind a woman in a horrible little french car doing 50 in the outside lane on the a42. Inside lane deserted, flashed her to get her out the way, she eventually moved over but the moment I was clear of her she pulled staight back into the fast lane doing 50

It's like its a status thing, "oh I can't go in that lane I'm far much better than that" the amount of ppl I have caught on camera just hogging the lanes it's unreal.

Aww I am gonna miss going through puddles on purpose just for a laugh haha only messing yeah think the middle lane or for Ireland the right lane

The thing I don't get right, if someone is in the right hand lane on a dual carriageway and is doing 60 or something like that... You're technically not allowed to undertake...or flash actually, so what can you do? Are you allowed to undertake in some circumstances?

I know you'd expect police to look at a case like that and think its ok - but I remember Clive saying about police ticketing someone who moved through a red to let a police car through so it makes you wonder..

Sent via carrier pigeon using Ford OC

There are certain circumstances where one is permitted to '' undertake '' or pass on the left documented in the Highway Code.

So is it illegal now to sit in the middle lanes doing 70 now? kind of makes the other lanes pointless now and everyone is now supposed to chop in out dodging lorries left right and centre, or is it specifically for slow old dears trundling along?

So is it illegal now to sit in the middle lanes doing 70 now? kind of makes the other lanes pointless now and everyone is now supposed to chop in out dodging lorries left right and centre, or is it specifically for slow old dears trundling along?

You should keep left unless over taking, irrespective of speed. If there's no one ahead and you're doing 80mph you should still keep in the left lane until there's something to overtake

Brilliant, I have noticed that middlelane hoggers are all the same people - they sit 3" from the wheel and always look terrified

Maybe they have a phobia of metal barriers so they're trying to keep as far away from them on both sides lol.

It makes me wonder if a lot of people still think of the left lane as the "slow lane" meant for lorries only. But even if they did think that, a lorry could still undertake them at the speeds they do.

You should keep left unless over taking, irrespective of speed. If there's no one ahead and you're doing 80mph you should still keep in the left lane until there's something to overtake

That sounds like the correct way to do it, but it's not what I do. If I can see I will be overtaking something again in say 30 seconds, and that I won't hold anything up by staying in lane 2 or 3, I'll stay in the lane. I'm not sure but I think that's more like what they do in some other countries, maybe America. I used to always go back into the slow lane but then you end up stuck behind lorries waiting for a gap to overtake, or doing lots of lane changes when you don't really need to.

Maybe they have a phobia of metal barriers so they're trying to keep as far away from them on both sides lol.

It makes me wonder if a lot of people still think of the left lane as the "slow lane" meant for lorries only. But even if they did think that, a lorry could still undertake them at the speeds they do.

That sounds like the correct way to do it, but it's not what I do. If I can see I will be overtaking something again in say 30 seconds, and that I won't hold anything up by staying in lane 2 or 3, I'll stay in the lane. I'm not sure but I think that's more like what they do in some other countries, maybe America. I used to always go back into the slow lane but then you end up stuck behind lorries waiting for a gap to overtake, or doing lots of lane changes when you don't really need to.

Yeah I too take a more common sense approach, but if I know I'm holding someone up I'll more over immediately.

There has been many times I'm on the m25, 4 lane carriageway travelling on the inside lane 65mph and have seen a slower vehicle in lane 2 or 3 what am I meant to do go out around them in to lane 3 or 4 just to over take as much slower vehicle when they are causing a problem to other road users???

I understand the rules of undertaking, if in traffic and the outer lanes are travelling slower than you, that's the only time I know you can undertake on the inside.

There has been many times I'm on the m25, 4 lane carriageway travelling on the inside lane 65mph and have seen a slower vehicle in lane 2 or 3 what am I meant to do go out around them in to lane 3 or 4 just to over take as much slower vehicle when they are causing a problem to other road users???

I understand the rules of undertaking, if in traffic and the outer lanes are travelling slower than you, that's the only time I know you can undertake on the inside.

Personally I'd be very tempted to undertake them. I'm almost always doing 70 (75 on the speedo) so I would probably be doing 15mph more than the slower vehicle in your example. Especially if they're in the third lane I'm not going to go across three lanes just to overtake them, although that would be the correct way to do it.

Personally I'd be very tempted to undertake them. I'm almost always doing 70 (75 on the speedo) so I would probably be doing 15mph more than the slower vehicle in your example. Especially if they're in the third lane I'm not going to go across three lanes just to overtake them, although that would be the correct way to do it.

Some times I do just becuase of the weight of the traffic and yes I shouldn't but its so dame annoying that ppl dont understand the basic rules of motorway driving, even when I do overtake them and I'm still doing 60-65mph they are miles behind "have they slowed down".

Let's hope it can be policed and let's hope that ppl learn from this simple basic driving rule.

I'm very surprised that most, if not all, posters think undertaking is illegal - technically it isn't - but the circumstances vary & personally I'd only attempt it in dire circumstances making my vehicle as obvious as possible & using all mirrors effectively & being ready to abort the manoeuvre.

The definitions of the Highway Code's use of '' DO , DO NOT , MUST , MUST NOT are key to this interpretation.

Charges of careless or dangerous driving are often brought against motorists who undertake.

In short it's not worth the risk.

I'm very surprised that most, if not all, posters think undertaking is illegal - technically it isn't - but the circumstances vary & personally I'd only attempt it in dire circumstances making my vehicle as obvious as possible & using all mirrors effectively & being ready to abort the manoeuvre.

The definitions of the Highway Code's use of '' DO , DO NOT , MUST , MUST NOT are key to this interpretation.

Charges of careless or dangerous driving are often brought against motorists who undertake.

In short it's not worth the risk.

Well said Mark. I've probably done a few pointless undertakes just to make a point to a middle lane hogger, but it probably never achieves anything. I wouldn't do this if there isn't a hard shoulder or some space to manoeuvre in case they decide to suddenly switch lanes, but I think you're right it's not worth the risk.

It is illegal to undertake using the hard shoulder to do so in normal circumstances.

I'm very surprised that most, if not all, posters think undertaking is illegal - technically it isn't - but the circumstances vary & personally I'd only attempt it in dire circumstances making my vehicle as obvious as possible & using all mirrors effectively & being ready to abort the manoeuvre.

The definitions of the Highway Code's use of '' DO , DO NOT , MUST , MUST NOT are key to this interpretation.

Charges of careless or dangerous driving are often brought against motorists who undertake.

In short it's not worth the risk.

From what I remember reading on this subject, you can only "undertake" i.e overtake on the left if the traffic in the right hand lane (the fast lane) is slow-moving.

How you define slow moving though, surely that is up to you to define/decide?

If you are going to undertake someone on the left, then surely you will always be going faster than them, thus they are always slower moving?

I've only ever undertaken a handful of times, and only when it's been a lorry sat in the middle lane doing 40-50mph.

From what I remember reading on this subject, you can only "undertake" i.e overtake on the left if the traffic in the right hand lane (the fast lane) is slow-moving.

How you define slow moving though, surely that is up to you to define/decide?

If you are going to undertake someone on the left, then surely you will always be going faster than them, thus they are always slower moving?

I've only ever undertaken a handful of times, and only when it's been a lorry sat in the middle lane doing 40-50mph.

That's almost exactly what I was thinking about posting next haha. I'm wondering how the traffic is defined as "slow moving" and maybe it's more about whether there is congestion in one lane but not in the lane to the left of it. Or there could be congestion in several lanes but the left one is moving faster.

I assume you can say it's ok to undertake a vehicle if that vehicle is being held up by others in front of it, but not if they are just driving slower than the speed limit, is that a good way to look at it?

There is no '' fast lane '' lanes are known as 1,2,3,4, etc, nearside is often used to mean far left.

That's almost exactly what I was thinking about posting next haha. I'm wondering how the traffic is defined as "slow moving" and maybe it's more about whether there is congestion in one lane but not in the lane to the left of it. Or there could be congestion in several lanes but the left one is moving faster.

I assume you can say it's ok to undertake a vehicle if that vehicle is being held up by others in front of it, but not if they are just driving slower than the speed limit, is that a good way to look at it?

Someone correct me if i'm wrong, but I believe both are exceptions to the "No undertaking" rule.

As is my understanding, whether it is traffic holding up the car you are about to undertake, or whether they are just driving slowly.

Personally, I don't see why it makes any difference, either way they are still "slow moving" (assuming you define it as that) and thus decide to undertake.

There is no '' fast lane '' lanes are known as 1,2,3,4, etc, nearside is often used to mean far left.

On a 3 lane motorway, I refer to the fast lane as lane 3.

On a 4 lane, I refer to the fast lanes as lanes 3+4.

On a 5 lane motorway, I refer to the fast lanes as lanes 4+5.

This is because these are the two lanes I tend to see people flying past in, everyone else in lanes 1-3 seem to keep fairly similar speeds, yet lanes 4-5 are the two I see Audi's, Mercs and BMW's flying past in at 90-100+ MPH.