New driving fines for traffic offences now enforceable

Article Sam Naylor
Aug 16, 2013
New driving fines 2013 police car image

From today motorists found driving carelessly will face steeper new driving fines

New driving fines come into force today, meaning motorists who drive carelessly will face harsher penalties if they are caught.

A set of new on-the-spot fines have been introduced for various driving offences, including tailgating and hogging the middle lane. These offences will now result in a £100 fine, falling under the careless driving penalty.

Police will also be able to fine drivers who do not give way at a T-junction or who use the wrong lane on a roundabout.

New fines for other driving offences have also been introduced, with the amount careless drivers have to pay, being raised across the board. The new penalties are as follows:

  • Failing to give way, wrongfully stopping on hard shoulder, obscuring the number plate, misuse of headlights, sounding the horn at night: £50 fine
  • Using a mobile phone while driving, speeding, reversing on the motorway, not stopping at a red light: £100 fine and points on your licence
  • Having no tax disc, not wearing a seat belt, driving without an MoT: £100 fine
  • Failure to identify driver: £200 fine and points on your licence
  • Driving without insurance: £300 fine and points on your licence
     

Although offenders will still be able to contest fines and points through the courts system, the government hopes that these new, higher fines will allow police to deal with careless driving without sending cases before the judge.

Road safety minister Stephen Hammond said: “Careless drivers are a menace and their negligence puts innocent people's lives at risk. That is why we are making it easier for the police to tackle problem drivers by allowing them to immediately issue a fixed penalty notice rather than needing to take every offender to court.

“We are also increasing penalties for a range of driving offences to a level which reflects their seriousness and which will ensure that they are consistent with other similar penalty offences.”

For more information visit the government website – gov.uk.

Read more about:

Disqus - noscript

this will only apply to ethnic minorities as usual,police will let there own colored culprits go free with a little laugh and joke.this is the council estate goverment culture

people still use mobile phones while driving, and you dont see police stopping themi,police cars can not be every where so it will be just another gesture
why not make it so u cant use a phone unless its in a hands free cradle
why not make it so all cars can only start when all seat belts are being worn
fix it so cars can only travel at the recomended speeds everwhere

What tosh - I got caught speeding on a duel carriageway on a bend and then got ripped for driver awareness and points so don't give me that rubbish. Traffic police do not play by the rules for anyone regardless of colour, religious background etc. If they can get money out of you unfairly it only matters what the colour of your money is!!!! In my sober state at the weekend I advised there was a p1ssed up person round the corner threatening people and urinating up the wal however he was more interested in chatting to some girl and told me to go away. And they wonder why everyone hates the police.

Why does that not include people that fail to indicate or indicate in a timely manner.
Now how do you fine yourself for not indicating?
I like the failing to give way one. Its not your right of way and you have to wait if your at a give way sign, now creeping out of a junction does not give you the right of way. WE only let you go because we don't want to hit you.

Middle lane hogs disrupting the motorway flow :(

please double the fine for middle lane a-holes. i mean ... why, whats so good about the middle lane anyway? nothing better than undertaking someone at twice their speed they soon move over #browntrousermoment

everyone in London will be paying the failure to give way at T junctions every time they go out,in London you dont get out of one unless you creep out to let people know you want to merge with traffic!.

How's that? If I'm driving in the middle lane at 70 [legal limit] and the slow lane [so called because it's for slow traffic] is very slow - trucks, caravans etc. - why should I get out of the way of a boy racer who wants to scream past at an illegal speed rather than move into the outside or overtaking lane [so called because back when drivers still had brains, it was used for overtaking] and why am I in the wrong?

I'm not talking about an empty motorway [as if] but a relatively packed one, with traffic in all three lanes - 'slow', 'up to seventy' and 'get out of my way I'm driving a penis substitute'.

Problem is the motorway cops are all boy racers also, they just have fast cars paid for by the taxpayers. I would love them to stop me driving at 70 in the middle lane, and they'd be told 'Take me to court'.

I don't pay money to police, it can lead to corruption.
Your problem is selfishness, all too prevalent today. You want to go past without moving your hands too much, so it's 'get out of MY way roadhog', just calm down and stop being a prat. You'll get there five seconds earlier than you would if you drove safely.

And I've seen too many boy racers sweep past at frighteningly stupid speed, only to catch up with them a few miles on where the flow slows, then pass them as their lane blocks. I just love that!

Oh you sound like a bright one; have thought for years the driving test should have an IQ test as first module to weed out those whose brain isn't up to it.
I stay in the middle lane if [and only if] the traffic in the slow lane is slow [usual] and of such density that to move into it means I have to wait for ages to get round something such as a caravan because of all the boy racers streaming past.

You aren't entitled to go past me just because you want to. You don't own the road. And 70mph is the maximum legal speed. Not difficult to understand surely?

@PETE ASSWORD : ive often thought there should be a nob head test before people get computers and bash out crap on their keyboard ....pete shut up you numpty . if that is why youre in the middle lane then it is called "overtaking" . youre supposed to be there . this is for middle lane hoggers - ones who stay there on an open motorway for no reason . IF I CAN UNDERTAKE YOU - YOU ARE A DRIVING SH!T . pleb of the day award has been announced , theyre carving your name on your trophy now . do one

oh you are jsut a grade A muppet . if someone wants to 'scream past' , rather than sit there being a road captain and letting your blood pressure give you a cardiac issue i suggest you think of your own personal safety and just get out of the way to the lane you should be in - sooner or later you will cause a crash with your chip on your shoulder . i hope soon they do fine you and take you to court , this rule is now being enforced to get rid of belligerent road captains like YOU .it is you who is selfish by thinking you are the law . you are not , why should someone cross from the inside lane to overtake a road hog and have to cross 6 lanes to do so ? its jeopardising both vehicles safety . get out the way or get off the road you shit driver playing your silly games on the motorway . you need banning asap . in the uk we drive on hte left unless overtaking , FACT .

dual carriagway - I'll admit that the word duel has a ring of truth but hell, can't you go back to school or something & learn English?

Are you the type of Muppet that sits in the middle lane when the inside lane is clear for the next mile or so? That's what this is all about

Stupid speed? My BMW can easily manage 3 figure speeds without any hassle - as can most Mercedes, Audis etc. What makes it dangerous is when people flick out in front of us at idiotic distances at 50-60mph causing us to to have to slam on the anchors. If you want to go slow, thats your choice, but its also our choice to go quickly.

all these offences are subject to the discretion of the charging officer, giving them the say so on wether or not( in their opinion) you have committed a crime....if everyone on the road were to obey this new keep left lane then why have the middle and outer lanes,its not always possible to return to the left and if you see cars ahead that you know (in your opinion) are travelling at a slower pace than you then why would you wish to go left to then attempt to get back into a now congested lane,another way of the authorities gaining monies from drivers whom are already stressed with the motorway system.......

Quite simple really, highway code says keep left except when overtaking, at least that was the rule in my 1960s highway code!

same in my 1980 highway code ,just think people don't read it anymore ,not a new law , its a old law just new fines.

it is more dangerous for me to take 3 lanes to over take someone, all because some numb lane hoggers feels its safer to sit in the middle lane in case they get a puncture or whatever the stupid reason people do it. or because the speed limit is 70mph and anyone else should not be doing 70mph . not only is it dangerous it is darn right rude and thoughtless. ban them all thats what i say! And pete as for do we own the road! NO but do you??? the roads would be alot safer without thick people with attitudes like yours. its people like you that do 60 mph for miles with mountains of traffic behind you then come to a overtaking lane and speed up to 75mph so no one can overtake you. morons best news ive heard all year

and also pete the slow lane genrally do at least 60 mph so if theres a mile between cars it acctually takes a while for you doing 70 to catch that vehicle up. meaning plenty of time to keep left then get back out when needed to overtake. sick to death of hearing the 70 mph excuse. simples its no excuse

If you are getting stressed by the motorway system, then perhaps you shouldn't be driving.

Highway code 264
You should drive in the left hand lane when the road a head is clear.
If you are overtaking a number of slower moving vehicles, you should return to the left hand lane as soon as you are safely passed.
I would therefore say that if you are in the 2nd lane and are over taking you are within the law to do so.
All this crap about motorways it is a single carriage way with 2 overtaking lanes note the word overtaking.

Highway code 264
You should drive in the left hand lane when the road a head is clear.
If you are overtaking a number of slower moving vehicles, you should return to the left hand lane as soon as you are safely passed.
I would therefore say that if you are in the 2nd lane and are over taking you are within the law to do so.
All this crap about motorways it is a single carriage way with 2 overtaking lanes note the word overtaking.

Driving without insurance should attract a fine of double the best quote to insure the driver who has no insurance. That is the only way there is an incentive to pay the premium.

There is no such thing as a slow lane or a fast lane. Did you ever read your Highway code???
All traffic must keep left except when overtaking.
so if you always follow this advice then the roads flow and no overtaking lanes get jammed up.

Joe Bloggs, perhaps you should join Tim at school and learn how to spell carriageway....

Driving without insurance: £300 fine and points on your licence

Cheaper than buying insurance.

I reported a police car recently for a number of driving faults including, not indicating when leaving a roundabout.

The traffic sergeant replied that using indicators was subjective, ie you you use them if you wish or if you think it would be helpful to other drivers.

Love you all condoning speeding, Would you be saying the same if your son or daughter was killed by a speeding driver... actually half of you would! speaking as the mother of a DEAD child i suggest you all think about why it is you break the law, I hope you kill yourselves and not someone elses child,

It is not more dangerous to overtake from lane 1 to lane 3 as you suggest - this is actually good driving and shows you are aware and in control of your vehicle. All it needs is constant planning (check mirrors at least every 10 seconds) your route ahead in plenty of time, indicating clearly and allowing lots of space. If you have to cut in front of someone, then don't do it - wait. Then, if the traffic ahead in lane 1 is close, you are "entitled" for the sake of good driving to stay in lane 2 to complete that overtake and then return to lane 1.
Totally agree with your views on lane hoggers though!
(From an IAM car member and motorbike commuter)

Driving without insurance is cheaper than insurance. Driving without tax is cheaper than most tax discs, and NO points. What is this?

ITS ALL ABOUT THEFT AND FRAUD....
traffic "acts" and "statutes" are fake laws of commerce and require your CONSENT FOR
THEM TO FINE YOU ... NO CONSENT-NO FINE.
The gov is a p.l.c. who want to screw every penny out of you and they are an unlawful assembly of scumtards worthy of a hangmans noose.
of course they will use their powers to "ENFORCE" it, and will commit TREASON against you to steal your money. . only a civil war will end this madness of corporate rules in a sovereign land, to hell with qe2 and the ship of fools known as hmgov plc

I would be very interested to see a copy of this correspondence, do you have it to forward to me?
Using indicators isn't actually enshrined in law, it's true, it's just in the Highway Code, which is treated as a guide to good driving technique.

I have often thought this also, and they wonder why people drive with none. If they put the price of this fine up (or better still, lower insurance prices) then no one would be driving without it. Thats my opinion anyway.

I have to correct you on a couple of things there, namely your naming of lanes - there are no "middle lane, fast lane, slow lane" on a motorway only the "driving lane" (also known as the inside lane) and "overtake lanes" which are the second, third + fourth lane. If your sitting at 70 mph on the middle lane and NOT overtaking anything (like slow lorries or caravans) then your eligible for fines because its reckless that you don't understand the rules of the road (and especially on such a simple road at that), if you ARE overtaking then you have nothing to worry, as for your the speed limits, most police officers concede that 70 mph isn't really ideal for cars built 40/50+ years ago from when the law was first introduced and that 80 mph (while not in the boundaries of the law) is suitable due to advancements in breaking systems, efficiency and as a last resort vehicle safety, I've safely had people and police (without blues on) driving by at 80+ mph but keeping a safe distance and still paying attention to whats happening in front

"WE?" Who are you some sort or road cult? How do you manouvere out of a junction, wait all day for the traffic to clear or them to install traffic lights. Wake up and smeill the coffee!

its just the police that want to make abit of money ...thats all

Driving without insurance: £300 fine and points on your licence

Cheaper than buying insurance.

lmfao !

another ploy from the government to cut the reported crime figures

When David Cameron came to power, one of his 1st statements was and I quote " I am going to stop the war on the motorist "... Short memory David ? Or just a damn liar ? Since his installation he has added several new laws actually attacking the motorists more than Labour ever did ! One was fining people who had cars locked away off the road with no insurance but still had a valid tax disc. Cash the tax in and sorn it then u were ok. How did he find that loophole to nick innocent off road motorists ? Also he"s introduced bigger road tax for bigger engines. Also allowed Town councils to increase parking charges. Now we have this latest assault on us drivers. It virtually gives the over zealous traffic cop the power of the Judge and Jury. (Police state or what ? ) I voted for Cameron, but I promise you that will never be repeated. I"d love him to read this and try and answer it with a clear conscience !!! From a hard up and persecuted motorist.....

lets pick on drivers cos thats all it is, money for nothing yet again!!!!!!!!!!

um.... its 70mph irrespective of what make your car is! what speeds are you driving if 50-60mph is slow? These reason for 70mph is to give other car drivers a chance and maintain some kind of safety on the road - its not your personal racetrack!

"WE" have to creep out of heavy traffic T-Junctions (that the local council have failed to install traffic lights at) because inconsiderate road users on the right of way fail to leave gaps to allow traffic to flow freely. I have even witnessed drivers deliberately closing gaps to prevent someone from pulling out of a junction, often exceeding the speed limit to catch up to the vehicle in front.

Our roads are incredibly congested and giving a little space to others goes a long way to making driving a less stressful experience, for everyone.

What about overtaking on the inside as many idiots do

dangerous is maybe the wrong word but still feels wrong when i have to do it! I totally agree! mirrow, signal, Maneuver, IE: if im going up a slip road to join a dual carrageway then my indicater is on before i get to the junction letting people know where i need to be simples! thats just the way my mind works and to be fair i always know whats going on around me which is exactly my point. If these people actually take more notice of whats going on around them they may realise that they are in the middle lane for no reason whatsoever. and probably half of the offences we have all been talking about. You are entitled to stay in the middle lane to overtake (which is overtaking!) but then keep to the left. To be honest i think alot of these people are just ignorant or just oblivious to whats happening around them.

And i stand plesantly corrected as max etc say my use of the middle lane! driving lane and overtaking lanes!!! wrong use of words!!! again lol

Shut up you tosser.

You're the racist..

Sorry, has nothing to do with speeding! lane hogging a motorway or dual carrageway no matter what speed you are doing is no different from speeding it is still against the law!! not taking due care and attention is against the law, as you read the artical if that is right they seem like they are classing lane hoggers as careless drivers. Which in my opinion is potentially more dangerous or at least equally dangerous as speeding.

you must be lane hogger then!!!! idiot

With all the cut backs the Government are doing, they have to get money somewhere to pay for the migrants that come in, as we have to house them, feed them all in the name of the EU and the Human Rights Act.

I call you out as a middle lane hogger

This is only to boost police figures up people make mistakes when at roundabouts and sat navs t junctions are a pain to get out of with no one giving way. If you leave a space on the motorway someone creeps in what exactly is the distance that not tailgating absolute joke this government be at a point when only the rich can drive.

I thought I was the only one that finds the fine for no insurance a mystery. My insurance (if I didn't have full no-claims) would be around £1000. So it would be worth me driving around with no insurance. If I get caught it only costs £300 and 3 points. The fine should be whatever the insurance costs, and then you have to pay for all the years you haven't been insured. Oh, and 3 points!

So how about high penalties for the idiotic drivers who try to use their vehicle as a weapon or tool against cyclists or hail abuse at them for no good reason?

For example, using the vehicle to push a cyclist into the kerb? I do not see anything about that in there. Or how about moving into the "Advance" box for cyclists (where supplied) then hurling abuse at cyclists who have the right to be there?

Yes, there are fines for passing the first line into the stop box as the driver has effectively passed a stop signal (how many know about THAT little issue??), but do you ever see the offending motorist being dealt with? NO!

I would also argue for fines on careless cyclists too for that matter. As a cyclist most of the time, it amazes me just how stupid some people can be and the amount of them with a death wish who fly straight through a red light regardless of anything else!

I also fail to see how they intend to deal with these fines, seeing as the "authorities" appear to spend 99% of the time looking the other way taking no notice of what is right under their noses.

How about CCTV at junctions on main roads? oh, sorry, we as tax payers would end up paying for it anyway, and who wants to pay more taxes? If it meant greater safety, the I would not, myself, object.

Bottom line: Sort out the other stuff, before starting on something new. In other words, get you house in order!

What a joke.

Pete, you sir is one massive goon, it's frightening that you somehow just made up your own highway code. 'The up-to 70 lane' hahaha. You just amused me. One lane, the left lane. The other 2/3 are over taking lanes no matter what speed you are going. If others want to go faster than you then accept it haha. Just use the furthest left lane if it is safe to do so and there is enough space.
Don't worry, the system always wins and you'll be out of pocket soon enough, and eventually without a license. Still better for the other road users which like to use the 'up to 70' and 'penis substitue cars' lanes to over take you in the 'very slow' lane while you take a coach sonwhere whilst you have no license :)

Haha Pete you goon, you never fail to amuse me. You and your personally vendettas against young people, other males like yourself, cars that are probably better than yours and ohh, people that just happen to drive at a speed a bit faster than you and you don't want to be inconvenienced by checking your mirrors, indicating, or actually anything more than looking forward in one lane and being a massive goon. Bravo :)

change the idiot law so we can all do min 80 mph!!!! i detest slow idiots on the road, as tho this country wasn't full off slow people anyways!!
if you cant do min 70 on motorway, then stay home!

Erm, no, where did you come up with that? If you get caught they don't just give you the £300 and some points and allow you on your merry way you know! Your car gets impounded! You are then left with finding your own way home as well as a bill of hundreds to get your car back which they will only then do if you provide a valid insurance certificate.

So.. no, not so worth it as you thought.

Agree with the Motorway rules. Don't agree that officers should be given the right to just issue when and how they like "in their opinion". Having been a part of the police service in the MET, there are many inexperienced officers who wouldn't have a clue. I guess its going on so long and will just continue anyway so hey ho..... Bank of POLICE - the only profit making bank in the world..... I was given a fine and 3 points because "I have to issue tickets to generate money to save my job" - now that's crime fighting.!!!! (Robert Uncle- Well said)

Cheaper to the illegal driver, but not to the victims, my brother was hit by an un-insured driver, causing loss of job, six months recovery, bone grafts and lifelong arthritis,- due to the driver being uninsured he got a pittance paid to him- after three years of waiting (there is a fund for victims of uninsured drivers). Driving uninsured is irresponsible and criminal, there should be prison time if you ask me.

This one is so COMPLETELY unenforcable I had to laugh, it would no way on earth stand up in court as there are too many other constitutional laws protecting rights in general to permit it:-

Failure to identify driver: £200 fine and points on your licence

LOL What a absolute complete and total load of BS - doing over 70mph is NOT necessarily dangerous at all which is why there was recent consideration to raise it to 80mph, not to mention and there are no speed limits on German autobahns. It completely depends on a large number of factors like weather/road conditions, visibility, vehicle braking capabilities and driver reaction time. If you think it is automatically "safe" to drive at 70mph or less no matter what the vehicle (which is what you are implying) then it is YOU who should be banned from the roads...

I can't wait for you to say "take me to court" and them walk all over you...

Yeah? Well you will still be fined for driving like a cunt.

£200 banger car, £300 & 3 points - still cheaper than a years insurance for most young'uns!

They may be called "on the spot fines" but until measures are in place to collect the fine there and then, they really don't achieve what they set out to do. It is well known that most go unpaid.

If you are fined on the spot in France, you pay there and then and, if you don't have enough on your, you are frog-marched to an ATM or bank, or failing that, the vehicle is impounded and you are incarcerated until the fine is paid. We need this sort of deterrent here.

i hope more cameras are set up in central london to stop red light jumpers!

if it isnt your right of way, and the main road has busy traffic dont try and nudge and force your way out! WAIT for someone to kindly GIVE WAY to you. they dont have to, so wait til they do. dont push in! (especially when a cyclist is coming)

When is there ever a mile between vehicles on the left! Maybe middle of the night, during a bank holiday.
A lot of lorries (Sainsburys etc) are speed limited to 50mph. At busier times, the moment you 'return' to the left lane you'll be stuck because of traffic 'overtaking' you, and you probably already had to brake. Now you have to spot a gap and back up to 70, repeat process. You're lane-darting over slow cars and lorries, creating more accident opportunities than if you stay in one place longer.
I drive a car-derived van which isn't particularly quick and keep to 60ish mph to save fuel. I find myself in the middle lane a lot.
Not sure how it's fair to be penalised for this!

Not quite sure why people are so against middle lane drivers, is it because a car is in the middle lane, usually doing 70mph, obstructing your path because you all want to flaunt the speed limit? Here's some scenarios for you if people stuck continuously stuck to the left hand lane at every possible gap - I would like to see how you react when trying to merge on and the left lane is full? - Cant imagine everyone having the same courtesy as others to merge out when approaching....Or in preparation to exit you stick to the left hand lane, knowing the lane is full so not wanting to risk overtaking and not finding a gap, trawling behind a lorry....if everybody stuck to left at all times when possible busier exits would cause a snails pace in the left lane. Or if everyone stuck to left at all times apart from over taking, imagine the weaving! Merging right to overtake a lorry, merging back into left, merging out again past a bus, then merging to the far lane past a Focus, then merging left, then again into the left lane.... this sounds the norm, but imagine 5 cars all trying this at once, plus the entire time your relying on predictability and perception of others. There are middle lane drivers out there now, people can merge on, changing lanes is easy and if people want to speed the far right lane is there...

what constitutes a 'lane hogger'? How long does the law require you to be in the middle lane before you should pull over? Where is the line drawn so to speak, 30 seconds of being in the middle lane after you've overtaken? 1 minute?

6 points min, not 3.

Im disabled what new measures are going to be put in place to stop ignorant drivers parking on the pavement so I have to go in the road with my wheelchair? 30 years ago if you had so much as a wheel on the kerb u were fined! And even now if you so much as touch the kerb in your driving test its an instant fail! To much paper work and res tape for the police to be able to get on with they're job!

Hahaha!! Is anyone falling for this? We drivers are just another revenue source for the Government or Councils. (Whoever these fines go to).

You shouldnt have to dart in and out as posts read before theres nothing wrong with staying in the overtaking lane if you are genuinely overtaking but thats not the case most of the time, people generally stay in that lane untill they actually realise someone is behind them. which in my eyes is not paying attention or being ignorant, i really find it hard to believe that a great deal of people drive under 60mph on a dual carriageway or motorway! even most truckers seeing as its is 60 mph speed limit on a motorway on hgv i believe, so in my eyes if you gennerally drive at 60 i really dont undestand why you would have to be in the middle lane alot. this i what im saying you more than likely have plenty of time to go left for 3-4 minutes for example then overtake then back in no reason to stay in the middle lane if you dont have to, i drive a van also and i see it day after day, with my own eyes and i dont need to stay in the middle lane.

its a nusience, it clogs the roads up, its rude and careless (in my opinion)

Maybe what your saying is if you cant beat them join them!!!!

Maybe just maybe.. the price of insurance is outrageous in the first place. And people who are on poverty wages (most of the UK) simply can't afford it, but can't afford not to drive or they lose their job and can't feed their family. Not like this government or any previous government cares. They are not bothered about me you or anyone else, this is nothing more than another form of taxation to cover their corrupt a*ses an provide income for themselves and their wan*er bankster friends. The police are now a glorified debt collection agency.

Absolutely correct *claps*

Also to 'drive' means to act in commerce I.E. taxi DRIVER. bus DRIVER. TRAIN DRIVER. Word magic all acting in commerce. Now if you was to claim you LAWFUL right to TRAVEL. They can't enforce anything on you.

I love how uphold law as become enforce statutes. That should give the game away that we are in a corporate fascist dictatorship.
But I digress most idiots in this country want to be ruled by psychopathic murdering scumbags. Or it sure seems that way.

You sir, are a twat. It's people like you who cause all the traffic issues but no no carry on doing it and earn yourself a nice £100 fine. Then who will be laughing

The police unfortunately are taking money off of the public in order to make more money to put into the big black government hole for them to waste and bomb places like Syria. They haven't privatized the police yet, so instead they are cracking down to make you pay for the irresponsibility of the bankers over the last few years. Nice isn't it.

No matter which lane you are in, if you are doing 70mph you cannot be hogging the lane as the highway code says 70mph is the limit. There are absolutely no circumstance under which you can go faster. So at 70mph any vehicles behind you wont even catch you up! How can any court deny this if you contest an over zealous copper trying it on?

I agree the price of insurance is disgusting, mine is £1000 a year and I only have a little 1.2 Renault Clio. Yes fair enough I only passed my test in March, but I'm 29, not some young racer. If I compare my £1000 insurance to £300 fine, imagine what a lot of other people think when their insurance quotes are higher.

Shut up you tosser.

You're the racist..

Why not fine lorry drivers trying to overtake each other in the motorway without concern for others? One of them is doing 60 the other 62, they don't look at their freaking mirrors and think because their lorry is bigger they can drive however they want.

Your choice to get a speeding ticket then :)

Its the motorist that gets hit everytime. To the police it is easy picking, as there is not much work envolved, apart from sticking their blue lights on. Serious crimes do not bring in much revenue. Hence all these silly new laws, Why don't they do their job properly and make the Uk a safer place to live, and get theirself some credibilty back with the public.

your right of course, Car Driver, but im sure weve all occasionally been in that situation where if you dont start to creep out of a busy junction, you would literally be sat there all day cos NOBODY would dream of letting you in.

You've obviously never driven in London - or you'd still be there!

Rascist comment, Robert uncle, rascist comment!

finding more ways to rob money from public? why not stick a police man on our car tops.

Far too simplistic, really. Example: I am driving on a motorway at 70mph, the legal limit on a motorway. I am in the centre lane, in the left nad [slow] lane there are trucks grinding along, cars towing caravans and the timorous in Morris Minors, average speed 4-50mph. If I drop back into the left lane, I have to slow considerably, and then watch as traffic streams past me until I can safely move out again. In the fast lane, boy racers stream past at 90mph plus. I stay in the middle lane a) because I am at the legal speed limit and therefore NO ONE SHOULD BE WANTING TO OVERTAKE ME AS TO DO SO WOULD BE BREAKING THE LAW. b) because it is unsafe to keep lane changing because some twat wants to go past me but doesn't wanat to use the right hand [overtaking] lane.

Further, in the 1960s, there were few motorwaays as I recall, and what there were weren't crammed with vehicles, so driving along in the middle lane made no sense. Equally, now, at night, or with unusually low traffic levels, if the left hand lane is free, I will move over. If it isn't, I am overtaking the traffic in it, not lane hogging; which doesn't stop the twats from blaring their hornes, since the number one priority for them is them, no one else gets consideration.

I'd like to see the police try to prosecute me. I would suggest to them they chase and prosecute all the boy racers steaming past at illegal speeds.

The highway code also says you should keep to the left most lane on motorways and dual carriageways. The additional lanes are for overtaking. It's not your job to enforce the speed limit. If the car behind you is speeding move to the left when you can, let him speed off an kill himself, keep yourself safe.

I heard the rule is 1 mile. If you travel over a mile in the middle/outside lane when there is room to move left you would be at risk.

The rule I stick to is if I can move back in, allow cars behind me to pass and then move back out just before catching another car ahead then I'll move over. Also if the car behind is going a lot faster I'll generally just move out of the way, I don't really fancy being rear-ended.

You are also meant to use your common sense. It's nothing to do with speeding, it's not your job to enforce the speed limit. Another motorist breaking the law (speeding) doesn't justify you breaking the law (lane hogging). With regards to the joining traffic, there is nothing wrong with moving right if you can see slower traffic joining in your lane, that would be overtaking.

Just another excuse for sad, jobsworth deviants to hide behind the state, and misuse this legislation, and bully people. What lovely, 'non-racist' folk they are.
The problem here is the ambiguity within the legislation, and 'lazy law' is always dangerous law. Whenever legislation is 'GIVEN' to the police that is open to interpretation, it IS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, misused.
Still, I wonder what the penalty would be for driving through a housing estate at 60mph, at three-o-clock in the morning, with no headlights on, for no reason. Knocking someone over and killing them, and then lying about the circumstances in court.
Anyone want to guess the former employment of that splendid individual?

If you were doing 70 and a lorry 300 yards ahead of you was doing 60 it would take you a minute to catch up to the back of the lorry.

After reading the post by Petepassword (or should that be Numbnutsnigel) I
was about to go on a rant. ONLY to find Lane hogger hater had beaten
me to it ;-)

I, on many occasions, will 'undertake' these morons in lane 2 to
save needlessly going from lanes 1 to 3 to 1
According to the highway code this
SHOULD be impossible for me to do. The only reason it IS possible for me
to do is because the likes of Numbnutsnigel aren't adhering to the
highway code. This, your worship, is my defence for the case now in front of you.
30 years driving and 15 of those despatch riding.

if the cars in the "slow lane" are doing 50 and you are in the middle lane doing 70 you are not breaking the law as you are overtaking, its to stop people sitting in the middle lane when there is nothing in the slow lane thus you either undertake or have to use the 3rd lane to overtake

so £100 for hogging the middle lane??? thoughtless idiots, there is a lack of common sense on the motorways as it is, using the middle lane for cars is the safest option on motorways due to the lorries and caravans having to drive slower and the fact that if you have cars speeding up pulling into the middle lane at the same as cars are trying to slow down to get back into the slow lane spells a recipe for disaster
quite often i have seen traffic police and enforcement officer vehicles allowing speeding traffic in the outside lane, so by sticking to the legal limit of 70mph and hogging the middle lane i risk a £100 fine but they turn a blind eye to people speeding in the right hand lane?? i know which lane i'll be hogging from now on

Comment to all of the middle lane haters, it works best at night...
When we see spot one of these middle lane hoggers , approach one at speed moving from lane 1-3 not undertaking but right up behind them hold on your full beams , safely get past and then move seamlessly back into lane 1 . Like a good driver we are !

Enjoy ha

I was , before retirement , a professional driver . I still drive my own car . My pet hate ? Those who hog the middle lane on a motorway . Now , let's look at a gormless clown who is driving his clunker with 68 on his speedo - which means he's probably doing 65 .
How do I get past him ? - Answer by accelerating to 80+ so that I can get past him asap then let my speed drop back to 70 , checking my mirrors of course constantly , so as to avoid the utter morons who are doing 90+ in their mercs and beemers in the outside lane . Then I'm back in the inside lane .
So I guess I just broke the law .
Now , you name it , I've driven it . (ok- within reason) . Here's a few things you don't know .
Give way to buses on a mini-roundabout . Yes - read your Highway Code .
Be aware that using your rear fog-lights is a very bad idea . Why ? - because if you DON'T use them , if someone hits you in the back it is still their fault . If you DO use them and forget to switch them off you can be done . So no upside , a downside .
If you are in front of a bus or a lorry , be aware they cannot stop as quickly as you .
Emergency stop ? - you just got quite a few tons up your rear end .
Always practice "defensive driving" - not avoiding hitting the idiot , make sure the idiot doesn't hit you .
MIRRORS , MIRRORS , MIRRORS .
Oh , by the way , if you need to look at your Rev Counter , you are a clot .
Lastly , (thank goodness I hear you say) , if you run out of fuel , you really should not be allowed to drive , if you are driving without Insurance or MOT , well I would like to put you in prison .

I am an experienced driver who has passed advanced driving test and have driven in over 40 countries, including long distances across Europe and the US. Your attitude of sitting in the middle lane just because you driving at the speed limit is selfish and dangerous. It is not up to you to Police the roads. I have just returned from driving to Sweden, going through Holland, Germany and Denmark on the way. It is only in the UK that ones see this kind of middle lane hogging - in every other country people move over and let faster traffic pass. Your attitude causes bunching which can lead to unnecessary braking (at high speed) and sometimes multiple pile ups. if you have to keep changing lanes to let traffic pass so be it - all lanes except the inner lane are overtaking lanes.

But you don't get 3 points for driving without insurance, you get a minimum of 6 points, so if you are caught twice within a 3 year period you would be banned (as you would have a total of 12 points). And what happens if you have an accident?

Not having insurance will certainly cost you more in the long run!

With the increasing number of ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) cameras on our streets, I think uninsured drivers will find it more and more difficult to get away with driving without insurance.

I recently bought a car and although it was insured, the Motor Insurance Database hadn't been updated so I got stopped by three different police cars on one journey across London!

You would have to be a complete idiot to drive a car without insurance in this day and age.

How about fining those annoying cyclists who keep undercutting everyone, weaving in and out or speeding through zebra crossings and red lights. I'm a bus driver and literally EVERY day I see cyclists get in near misses with buses and trucks, the other day I tried pulling into a bus stop and two cyclists just hopped off the pavement and straight into the space I was pulling into!

'misuse of headlights' I wonder if that is designed to catch all the people that flash there lights to warn about speed traps?

'reversing on the motorway' I will remember this new law, the next time the Police wish me to reverse to clear a motorway that they have just closed.

well all I say is get all shit drivers off the road and we will all be ok

You all might like to know that you are allowed to do 70 mph in what some call the "slow" lane. There are no differences between the lanes. It's 70 mph in ALL motorway lanes.

Why don't the police enforce already existing laws like driving and holding a mobile telephone? It's rife.

I have had my license 10 months and I'm 20...I drive a Honda Civic 1.6 VTEC SE Sport 3dr and mine is only £700 a year.

You must live in a really high risk area....

The UK should do what Australia does. 3rd party insurance is automatically applied on the car licence. That way EVERY car that is licensed has insurance. Comprehensive is an optional extra. What do you think?

This is really simple! I suggest you start to use your rear view mirrors more in order to judge the speed of vehicles approaching from the rear (and therefore the time they will take to reach you) at the same time estimating the time it will take you to reach the vehicle in front, you then move to an OVERTAKING lane to overtake the vehicle in front in sufficient time so that you don't have to slow down. It soon becomes instinctive. Tailgating is a symptom, people not moving to the left lanes are the cause

So basically there's so much crime the police become judge and jury. Isn't this the futuristic dystopian plot behind the film/comic called Judge Dredd?

too much POWER o the police who could stop anyone for no reason but to hit quotas

Glad tailgaiting gets covered. Absolutely illogical. I have no problem with people driving faster than me as long as its not excessive. But if you don't have the skills to overtake then you probably don't have the skills to drive fast. Also, you slow down traffic, people rightly slow down when you present them a hazard- the amount of tailbacks i've come across caused by some idiot making it impossible for the person in front to drive for no logical reason. Most of the time the tailgaiters aren't even going faster by the time they overtake. There is not a single shred of logic its unbelievable. I'm going to build a distance/speed camera for the back of my car and catch the idiots, and commercially release it.

impounded car. ban after two times. having to pay up damages if you hit someone- could be more than your yearly salary..

its not exactly the same as you mentioned, but you have a right hand lane too. If a driver wants to overtake because he is held back, should they be driving slower because you want to drive fast? You should move out if someone is indicating right to pull out in front of you, and there is space. granted if there isn't distance, they shouldn't be and if you haven't clearly moved over.
the hogging is not driving whilst lorries are clogging up the left lane. (BTW WHY NO LAW ON LORRIES DRIVING OUTSIDE THE LEFT LANE??) its when there is reasonable space. I agree there have been times where it is ridiculous to overtake over three lanes and come back into the left lane. I've had drivers using the right hand lane only too, at 3am completely clear, driving 50mph on a few occasions too.
one weird law no one's noticed: HORN USE IN THE NIGHT. surely the horn if used rightly shouldn't matter whether its night or day-its to avoid accidents. If its used incorrectly as to cause danger or nuicance or harrassment it should also be enforced in the day too.

it should be slow lane left 58 middle 70 outside 100+
the highway code was written by who? 47 years of trouble free quick skilled accurate driving no points clean license fast car low insurance etc,stop reading a book or don't drive.

highway code says etc if people with a couple of years driving compile this highway code they are not experienced enough.you need forty years or more in before you can even consider compiling a book of driving.how can i possibly take any notice of such nonsence,the cars they tested for distances of stopping and thinking were old english badly made vehicles from gormless factory workers with zero engineering knowledge no brakes dangerous suspension comedy tyres comedy chassis and the highway code gave them no limit in the begining and then seventy only because a sooped up car drove 150, if i read that book with my modern super car it would like reading how to drive on the road with your new model "t" ford we sell every colour as long as it is black,this country complete and utter lunatic laws to rob your money and your falling for it with your lane rubbish.and 70 limit,my car ticks over faster than that and can brake on a sixpence instantly.i have to lower the gears in sequencial to get 70 to be within the "law"

It reads rather as if your road sense is as bad as your grammar and spelling.

Dont think you got what Simbob was saying there Mark! I can understand you lot getting annoyed about middle lane hoggers if the left lane has decent gap (doesnt happen apart from night), but if the middle lane hoggers are going 70 and overtaking a stream of lorries etc etc than doesnt bother me if there in there, prefer that than someone messing about weaving in and out in front of me to be honest. Doesnt make a difference no one will change there pattern anyway, its virtually un-policable offence with with plenty of excuses and get out clauses you could think of!

Shouldn't be ABLE to reclaim the car in my opinion. And bill them for the cost of towing!

"..motorists who drive carelessly will face harsher penalties if they are caught.." GOOD!
But unfortunately it has to include the word 'IF'!

There goes the body of Elias Grey, he died exercising HIS right of way! He knew he was right as he sped along, but HE'S JUST AS DEAD AS IF HE'D BEEN WRONG!

I think its great ,it will stop the divs sitting in the fast lane doing 60,if we under take we get nicked,i hope the old bill nick 1000s

Did you mean 'could' or should that word have been 'will'?

You sound like a sensible driver, John. Shame that there are not more like you.

The standard of English in these comments leave me wondering how anyone manages to read the highway code, never mind how they understand it. If this is an indication of our general education we should be ashamed.

I understand the Late Gerald Nabarro was successfully prosecuted for this offence a matter of decades ago.

"Although offenders will still be able to contest fines and points through the courts system, the government hopes that these new, higher fines will allow police to deal with careless driving without sending cases before the judge." Umm, how do they work that out then? I would think if the there are thousands flocking to the magistrates to contest their non endorsable £30 Fixed Penalty, then increasing the minimum on the spot fines by more than three times what it previously was will more likely mean that the Magistrates will see an increase by the tens of thousands of people contesting this ridiculous 100 quid for offences which I would argue are extremely vague and open to the Officer's own interpretation. How long does one need to be in the middle lane before it is deem to be 'hogging?' Just how close does one have to be the vehicle in front before it can be deemed tail gaiting, is it determined in inches, yards, maybe meters? Or does it depend on which cop is two vehicle's behind and his own interpretation that a colleague of his may not? These are pathetic revenue scams for the Government end of story. Yes, we can see why they may be valid for going through a red light or driving without insurance because these offences can and almost always do affect a second and innocent party. But not giving way at a junction? What is that defined as then under the Road Traffic Acts (Act 3, scene 4 "More made up stuff to get revenue. And.....ACTION!) offence list? "Not offering to allow someone out before you pull out yourself commits the offence of not being polite enough, contrary to sub-section B and Rule A on page F under criminal Code D. 3.1A of "I say old chap, how rude of you not to offer to give way! Hundred Quid!

Oh dear, now we all have to drive responsibly, what ever next? Perhaps they will make murder illegal? Well thats it, we must be living under a dictatorship!

"Afternoon Sir. I've stopped you to speak to you regarding the manner of your driving today. I have been 3 cars behind you now for at least half a mile, and observed you using the middle lane for well in excess of 40 seconds without removing yourself from t's vicinity. Ok Sir, I plan to deal with this offence by way of £100 fixed penalty ticket. Have a nice day, Sir." See there is a word there that is very relevant to this situation, that word is 'Fixed.' Just like the professional tennis player who is corrupt and has been paid to cheat and knows that he's about to lose by 3 Sets to 0 before a ball has been hit and thus costing trusting and honest people to lose Millions on their wagers who bet on the corrupt cheating player to win, so this type of Fixed fine really does seem fixed with the outcome known before the game begins and in this game it's a contest between you, the random person who works for a building company, vs the witness against you wearing a number on his collar and the occupational title of 'Police Officer' claiming that you did commit some offence or other. Who are the magistrates going to believe in 99.6% of cases? Yes, The Plod and his 'evidence.'

No no nob, Murder is a crime, you break the criminal law if you commit homicide. You break no law if you don't give way at a junction, you commit an illegal offence. If your not aware of the difference in each of these definitions, I suggest you do the research.

I suppose you think it's now acceptable for the Government to up the police targets for how many tickets they must issue each month what with the nice people over at the Government making up even more legislative 'laws' using their 'what can we make up today and try and pass off as an offence?' mentality. Like I said, I have no issue at all with police being asked to fine motorists for real law breaking activities such as driving while over the limit, excess speed in built up area and having no insurance to name but a few. These are against the law and rightly so because they are crimes! The drunk driver will likely run down an innocent pedestrian or crash into a family on the way shopping before fleeing the scene of the accident. The 19 year old idiot 'boy racer' driving thrugh town and past the school at 85MPH is going to kill that 7 year old instantly who's skipping home after her day at school and the guy who can't be bothered to get insurance cause he only paid 80 quid for the shed he drives isn't bothered about anyone else. When he collides with John Doe brand new 45 Grand Ferrari and writes it off, too bad really, Mr Doe will just have to write it off as a loss. These are actual crimes, real ones! Not slamming on the blue lights, activating the sirens, hitting speeds of 90 because the officer is not going to allow that driver to get away with not indicating to change lanes! And if the driver decides he isn't in the mood to pull over today, and 4 other police vehicles are now racing to assist with blue lights flashing all over the place and sirens coming from North South East and West to chase this man failing to stop are putting everyone elses lives in danger now because this high speed pursuit that now has 6 police cars chasing, one helicopter hovering and 2 roadblocks pending has been instigated because someone may not have signalled to change lanes at 3 am when it's him and the Police car on the M5 only anyway! This must be part of their oath they swear to always do their absolute best to see that the peace be kept. This would make sense as they ram someone off the road, smash the window and drag the man out for not using his indicator.

Well I can't say I am unsympathetic to anyone no knowing the highway code in it's entirety based on the legislative amendments, changes and constant creation of new 'laws'. We are up to 30 new legislative laws passed in 2013 alone. And did you miss Watchdog's episode earlier in the year, not the one exposing parking fines scams, the other one regarding the DVLA. Watchdog exposed that the DVLA had decided to bring into law (via legislation, *sigh*) that drivers licence photo's must be replace with an updated photo every ten years. No problem so far. The DVLA got this legislation passed though parliament and subsequently signed into law and decided it was not going to inform anyone of the new 'rule'. The way the DVLA decided to alert their list of registered keepers with valid licences who hadn't updated their licence photo was by sending them a fine through the post for not acting in accordance with the DVLA's rules when the recipients of these fines had not been informed that anyone had changed the rules. If it's your game then you can play by your own rules I suppose and change them whenever you feel like without telling all the players who have a right and reason to know.

Agreed, but vehicles still kill at a ratio of 58:1 compared to bikes (i.e. 1 bike vs. 1 vehicle). Why not sign the Get Britain Cycling ePetition like Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Branson & Lord Sugar have done. Proper infrastructure will mean cyclists are less likely to get away with these things just like it is in Denmark and The Netherlands. It will also mean less cars on our gridlocked roads because more law abiding people will cycle knowing they are not being discriminated against or being targeted by bullies in cars who generalise against all cyclists.
(I do drive and ride motorcycles as well as cycle)

Agreed. Where I live cars are often parked on the road forcing many pedestrians out into the road to get around these cars. My wife has similar problems when out walking with our children using a pram.

Agreed... And as a cyclist I would also like to see a similar clampdown on idiots on bikes jumping lights. They annoy me as much as they annoy any other road user or pedestrian.

It's all about revenue collection, nothing to do with safety.
Unless you haven't noticed, the good old boys in blue ( policy enforcers ) have more power than god. We live in a police state, get used to it. Looking forward, I wonder how they'll police breathing in the not to distant future. Or is that what carbon tax is all about.

How on earth do you get the idea that there are no speed limits on German Autobahns ? You obviously haven't driven over there for many years ! There are very few stretches that are delimited it started back in the mid 90s that limits were introduced and they are rigidly enforced and you are obviously totally unaware that the guide lines recommend a maximum speed of 140 kph (86.9mph) which most Germans don't even drive at. the normal speed driven by most people is around 120kph (74.5mph) which isn't that far off our speed limits here. so I guess you should really stick to what you know about instead of spouting drivel.
(Expat returned home after 25 years living in Germany)

just away to make more money, fine dont actually physically stop these thnigs from happening..... just to make money, like speed cameras

You should visit Thailand sometime. The average wage is about 400 baht per day (about £8), and most can't afford insurance. They can barely afford to buy a car. It's legal to undertake, and vehicles will regularly be travelling towards you, on your side of the road. I've seen many motorbike scooters that are carrying 4 people on them. I've seen what looked like about 15 people in the rear section of pickup trucks. Potholes are often the size of paddling pools, before they get fixed.
I seriously hate road-hogs, but after visiting Thailand, I have a feeling that we're all getting stressed over nothing. European roads are a dream, compared to most roads in Asia.
Oh, and insurance is pretty much optional. But it'd only cost you about £30 per year anyway.

Wow, bet that suggestion will have the police bricking themselves. Pretentious twat.

Oooooh "Take me to court".. That's a policeman's job you clown. Why say that as if its meant to annoy or upset the Police? And FYI precious, you don't hand money over to the police. They give you a ticket and you pay it at court.

Not really. The impound of the vehicle will cost £120.00 plus £25.00 a day in storage fees. You'll only get your car back once you get insurance and you'll only be able to pull this trick once, as its 6 points you will receive (bumping up your premium even further) Crack on though, just don't hit anyone, as then you'll have to dip into your own pocket to fix their car as well as your own.

Who I'm sure you'd go running to with a tale of woe if your car gets hit by an uninsured driver.

The trouble with the Motor Insurance Database is it is too slow to get updated when you renew. last time my car insurance was renewed, even though I stayed with the same company and paid by continuous direct debit; there was over 7 days when my details were removed from the MID. I could have been stopped any time in that period; wasting both my time and the Police's. If you are going to implement something this Draconian, then it has to work properly.

With an average of 2,900 people being killed a year over the last decade, I'm looking forward to the day that drivers like you get priced off the roads!

I think he is right . To lower the debate to personnel insults really says more about you than anything else.

i have seen the way some police drive we should be able to take there number plat and thay should be get a fine aswell

this is more about generating money than about safety.

This does not make a lot of sense as there has to be a police presence to catch offenders in the first place! when did you last see on a regular basis a patrol car on the motorway? unmarked cars are only there to catch offenders and do not stop the problem.
The increased threat of being caught is the deterrent not increased fines! Visible police presence is the main deterrent as can be seen how people suddenly obey the law when they see a patrol car.

I would add to the list of offenses - Driving on sidelights / driving without lights in rain or mist/fog. Personally think that manufacturers should fit light switches that are on or off (if your ignition is 'on', your headlights are on. If it's 'off', your sidelights are on.

they do. on modern motorcycles.

Boon
does your mother know you are out?

I agree

Three rules for motorway driving, Outside lane, Outside lane, Outside lane.

Who on earth reverses up the motorway?????!!!?!?!

there are too many members of CLOCK (center lane owners club) the worse are the cars towing a caravan who stay in the center lane when there is nothing in the nearside lane as you are not meant to pass on the left you are then made to move from the left to the center then again from the center to the outside lane then back across both again, i was once stopped by the police for passing a car who was sat in the center lane at 50 MPH and as i was towing a trailer was not entitled to use the third lane so i passed on the left doing 60 MPH i had tried flashing my lights to get him to pull over to the left but he must have been a member of CLOCK and as i passed on the left i was stopped and fined but he just drove past still in the center lane on an empty road and probably thought i was wrong for passing him, i am happy that people using the center lane when there is no need to should be fined.

Then put you car on the drive and polish it. Or if you've got the balls race it on a track. You can always buy a less polluting car suitable for British roads.

Once you have overtaken, (to quote you) "the trucks grinding along, cars towing caravans and the timorous in Morris Minors, average speed 4-50mph", then you should pull back over into the left hand lane.

The offence of "middle lane hogging", is for people who stay in the middle lane, even when there are no vehicle in the left hand lane, and they show no intent of moving over.

Pretty easy to understand.

But obviously you are one of those middle lane hoggers, otherwise you wouldn't be trying to justify your persistence of staying there.

hows it reckless driving when there's no one on the motorway?

Not all these should be fined,some could be a one off mistake. so making a mistake is now illegal? & on roads with fluidity of traffic some of these things can become unavolable. Just another money making scam.

unavoidable *

a) because I am at the legal speed limit and therefore NO ONE SHOULD BE WANTING TO OVERTAKE ME AS TO DO SO WOULD BE BREAKING THE LAW.

Provided you're doing a true 70 as confirmed by GPS, not the '70' your under-reading speedo claims. And, breaking the law or not, you're not a traffic officer, so if you're purposely impeding the progress of others you're JUST as much of a self-righteous-prick/accident risk as the bloke behind you in the Audi flashing you to speed up or move over.

b) because it is unsafe to keep lane changing

If you're unable to change lanes safely stay off the motorway for everyone's sake, your own included.

Just changing the subject slightly but who exactly is going to enforce these laws. I drove 40 miles from Derby to Sheffield last week on the M1. passed through three counties and didn't see one police car. And before you ask yes I am one of a dwindling number of traffic Police officers.

It's 6 points for no insurance plus a £300 fine (it's been 6 points for about twenty years), but when you go to get insurance and they find out about the "no insurance" points they charge you a fortune, which then leads to driving with no insurance again and again

All motorway delays, all motorway accidents, and most motorway litter, can be attributed to Heavy Goods Vehicles and their drivers.

BUT...only very rarely is there "nothing in the slow lane". In my experience of driving on UK motorways during the daytime, the slow lane is almost always full of traffic meaning there is nowhere else to drive but the middle lane (and, eventually, the fast lane). Only between midnight and 06.00 hrs is there "nothing in the slow lane" which makes this middle lane hogging rule slightly pointless as only 1% of the motorway driving population are at risk of flouting it !

HOWEVER...only very rarely is there "nothing in the slow lane". In my experience of driving on UK motorways during the daytime, the slow lane is almost always full of traffic meaning there is nowhere else to drive but the middle lane (and, eventually, the fast lane). Only between midnight and 06.00 hrs is there "nothing in the slow lane" which makes this middle lane hogging rule slightly pointless as only 1% of the motorway driving population are at risk of flouting it !

Not necessarily boy racers , mainly range rovers , audi's and posh cars Motor cycles , well they are a law to them selves !

Perhaps, as it is compulsory, the vehicle insurance industry should be regulated.
It badly needs regulation, for sure.

One thing they could get rid of is the "Undertaking" clause. There is no such thing IMHO. If I can "Undertake" you then you were in the wrong lane, that is the transgression.
As I'm driving a large van at (at least) 70mph keeping to lane 1 no way am I sweeping across 6 lanes all the time for people who simply can't drive to an acceptable standard.

Extremely reactionary changes, Conservative Party should be ashamed. Where does this scope creep change? life imprisonment for parking offences?
Get rid of most of this crap law and just demand people drive to a high standard or get moved off the road.
No1 problem, slow drivers. Scrap speed limits away from schools etc and set the current limits as the official "average" for passenger cars and expect people to keep up brisk progress. 70mph? lunacy. Even in a large van I average 85 on motorways in complete safety and on a bike 95 and up without causing a moment of inconvenience for anyone.

Not convinced, I travel about 100 miles a day on the M4 commuting during peak hours, and even though it's busy and I tend to press on a bit I'd say I spend a pretty equal amount of time in all three lanes.

My problem is I see this on the roads every day but where are the police? We need more traffic officers not less. There is going to be a problem when this happens but nobody sees it. And unless the camera system is improved, people are still going to get away with things.

more rules more big brother

Quite funny to think people think they have an argument for what really called 'being lazy' and staying in the middle lane. You may think its safer but really staying in the middle lane causes more issues for the slower and faster drivers than you may think because there is now 1 less lane being taken up by all the 'Perfect drivers' in the middle.

Unfortunately this is all hot air as there is currently no roadside mechanical box to witness and record dangerous driving, unlike those driving safely above the speed limit.

And haven't most of these issues been illegal for a while?

Utter rubbish!!!!

An interesting debate, some people for residing in the middle lane and some against.

Firstly, I'd tend not to call each lane slow lane / fast lane etc, as that is looking at it from a progress / speed perspective - looking at motoring on public roads in terms of speed is a little dangerous, don't you think?

Concentrate more on safety, residing in the inside lane always provides you with an escape route. Assuming someone was decelerating slower than the traffic in front, you feel he may run into the back of you. You have two options, one - move into the centre lane assuming it's clear or if not, you can escape into the hard shoulder and avoid collision.

If you're sitting in the center lane, you also have two options - one has potentially slower moving traffic and HGV's, the other may have traffic currently overtaking you. Where's your escape route?

Maintaining safety over maintaining the 'speed limit' is significantly more important on our roads.

This is all fair and well but ALWAYS remember you will get complete idiot officers who think that they control the law. I recently was pulled by 2 female officer in an ANPR vehicle and was able to track my speed. They pulled me for apparently driving 50 in a 30 (even though i wouldnt be stupid enough to do that especially when I had JUST seen them turn the same corner as me)
I told them I wasnt and they commanded that they were and when I repeated myself and said AGAIN no I wasnt and if thats the case can you show me your proof to which they replied "We dont need to show you proof and if you carry on you'll be arrested!"

Wouldnt mind, I was stood there in my Pyjama shorts and T-Shirt and just had to nip to the shop for milk before bed!
I wasn't shown anything and no action taken - So what was the point? Im sorry but if I was an officer and I seen someone doing 50 in a 30, they'd be getting fined!

What worries me is that these type of narrow minded officers will still patrol our streets.....and with these type of new laws which are all fair and well, how many complaints will be made with bogus allegations.......Know your rights. If you are being accused of something, make sure you can see their proof before admitting it.

This is all very well but I was insured with checkfigure insurance based on twist lane warrington. It turned out that the company having renewed my policy then ran off with the money but didn't insure, I had a cover note thats all, I was spot checked around 6 weeks into the insurance only to find they had gone off with my money and thousands of others money but failed to insure me. I had used this company for some 15 years so I had no reason to think there was a problem. However, it is the drivers responsibility to ensure that the insurance is valid and so I got fined and 6 points. The police were not interested in pursuing the insurance company that had caused this...and before people comment to say it serves me right, it could easily happen t you too, I had valid insurance, there is no way to make sure that the policy you have taken out is valid at all times without phoning up the insurance company each and every time you drive your car, or looking at the MID, which at the time of my offence did not exist (this was some 15-18 years ago) am not defending driving without insurance, I am trying to point out that things aren't always cut and dried, I have 25+ years NCD, I am a very safe driver but all these new rules could be used indescriminately with prejudice, I have been on the recieving end of this more than once, I am all for the police being able to inforce where it is applicable, but do I trust them fully to do this? I m afraid not....

Petepassword, do you drive a Honda Civic?

soon you will be fine for not wearing a name badge on your chest hahaha

people keep saying slow lane - fast lane,there is no such thing,lane 1 - 2 and three

An insurer with the words dial and direct in their name, in their incompetence, was unable to put my motorcycle on the MID for almost 5 months despite weekly phone calls of complaint! Eventually I cancelled the insurance and used a high-street broker who added me to the MID within hours.

You get what you pay for!

Although I don't think undertaking is good, I agree that very often, if I'm able to easily undertake someone when I'm going 70, then they were clearly in the wrong lane.
They could have moved over, and moved back without needing to "slow down" behind the crawling lorry.
Also avois me having to do 70 in the outside lane which is inevitably full of BMWs, Audis and Golfs doing 96

I know this is a kind of going off topic now but if you're going to go around calling people knobs and make out you have superior knowledge of the law, and patronising people by telling them to do their research.. May I point out that murder is not a crime that is defined/covered by statute and parliamentary legislation. It is only a crime under the common law. Homocide covers multiple aspects of ending a life.To say that you break the criminal law if you commit homicide is simply untrue. Some cases of homicide can be completely lawful, whilst other cases just classed as manslaughter. In fact the unlawful killing of a human being is only an offence under common law. Do you know the difference between common law, criminal law, contract law, rules, rules given the force of law as defined by statute, acts and statutes? If you're not aware of the difference in each of these definitions then I suggest you do the research. LOL

(I'd like to see the police try to prosecute me) you v them only 1 outcome i am afraid you lose then points on your licence but. there's always a but. don't get caught

Any time I go to visit my mom in Birmingham, I need to go back to the London philosophy, "Go now, or sit here all day." Kinda like just creep till I'm genuinely in the way, then politely thank them and pull out. The thanking in needed otherwise they get even more pissed off.

There is no 'fast lane' - other than the inside lane they are all for overtaking only . We drive on the left in this country. It annoys me that people decide they are going to travel fast today and drive entirely in the outside lane! This alone has caused people to think it is okay to undertake!

So what about the coppers who drive like morons just because they can get away with it? I'm not talking during a pursuit, or responding to a call, I mean general city driving. I've almost been run off the road by a copper at a merge in lanes, because he sped up alongside me at the merge to give me a dirty look and I had to slam my brakes on. Absolute garbage.

b) because it is unsafe to keep lane changing

if you cannot safely drive you car and change lanes you should give up your driving license as you are unfit to drive.
ALL you have to do to change lane to the left is use your mirrors properly then it is very safe to change lanes. its the people hogging the middle lane not letting people in the left hand lane out that makes it unsafe,

there is no such thing as a slow and fast lane and if a slow moving truck is there you are legally allowed to go in the middle lane till you pass them all then you should return to the left lane,

Insurance is too expensive and I am wondering what is the deal between government and insurance companies to make it mandatory and still so expensive. Before you take a ride you have to spend hours playing Gocompare. Ridiculous!
People under 25 are heavily penalized. They treat young people like children. Just wait and no one under 30 will be allowed to buy a lighter in Waitrose in this country.
Where is this country going? Welfare state and more government make people irresponsible.
Will you effectively defend yourselves by these things from newcomers/foreigners?
They will simply raise more children and override this little and poor civilization in next generations. Please don't be pussy and don't support pussy leaders especially those old mates scared of foxes in their backyards!
Democracy is for old people that is why this civ is slowing down. Country of Daddies! Let young people to breath and grow up.

What happened to enforcing the appropriate use of indicators? Only if i got 0.1p for ever failed use of an indicator, i would be a billionaire!

I think that driving without insurance should be an instant ban of a minimum 2 years. Caught twice, ban for life.

it should ALSO be the VEHICLE not the driver thats insured as the ANPR doesnt tell the police who is DRIVING the vehicle so as when its not the insured driver involved in an accident the insurance comanpy says nothing to do with us tell the police even though the had checked the vehicle on ANPR

it is still that and how many people stay out of a bus lane even though it is not in the hours it is in force even taxi drivers do it and they can use it 24 hours a day.

I have OFTEN seen cars driving past the matrix signs saying dont hog the middle lane even though there is not 1 vehicle in the left hand lane.

i agree personal insults shouldnt be included but someone who says they are unsafe changing lanes while driving a motor vehicle should be retested on their driving skills and I and most of the rest of competent drivers out there would not blame their inability to safely change lane as unsafe.

nicely put andy they should use rear view mirrors every 7 seconds as said in the highway ode not every half hour when the vehicle behind or the police car has been flashing them for 20 miles

if we can get a police man to enforce the law and fine them then maybe they will learn

but you cannot drive at 150 because the bloke is in front of you in the right hand lane doing 70 and if YOU undertake HIM it is YOU breaking the law.

there is actually 2 or 3 less lanes for less perfect divers as they are taking up the midde/3rd lane and via undertaking rules all the lanes to the left of them

if your in a queue of cars can you not slow down to let the car out of the junction does courtesy not exist in this country anymore

and if you hit a stationary vehicle in front of you that YOU COULD of stopped to avoid the insurance will say its your fault

new cars has daytime lights is driving really getting this nannyfied as to need lights during the day so people can see you.

The only thing police are good for is to squeeze money out of motorists. Day in day out hunting for worn tyres. It takes the police a long time to come to the aid of distressed people because they are not gaining as much money as they would be by giving you a ticket for going into the wrong lane or not having your number plate clean enough..the thing is, it's impossible for a human to live life mistake free in a robotic system, there should be some leeway or warning first, doesn't make sense to dish out £100 fines on the spot to good drivers that made a one off slight mistake. Bad enough with cameras all over the place, police being given unecessary power.

Sorry you'll have to explain that one again??

Funny also as a lot of people don't understand the meaning of undertaking on a motorway anyway, just because they pass you on the inside doesn't mean they are in the wrong or undertaking.

driving without insurance should be punishable with a prison sentence.

you get caught 2 or 3 times 1 year minimum imprisonment. then maybe the insurance will drop its price. as its gone up on average 472 pound per driver.

any EU or visitors to this country should be taken to court their and then and pay any fines if they cant pay, then the car should be taken of them until they do.

the anpr system does tell them who should be driving if its a female name and male driving it they will get a pull and vice versa

once it passes 10 pm the motorways quiet down a lot it still amuses me to see 3 cars on a 2 or 3 mile stretch of motorway and one tosser in the middle lane.

Yeah get rid of those stupid speed limits to stop that 96mph bunching and let's see who has the fastest car :o)

These penalties are not stiff enough to be deterrent to would be offenders. The DVLA must advise the government on how to toughen the penalty of driving without insurance so that it will reduce the premium of we driving with INSURANCE.

Who are ya , Who are ya.
Oh Robin van Persie!
Oh Robin van Persie!

I'm forever blowing bubbles,
Pretty bubbles in the air
They fly so high, nearly reach the sky
And like my dreams they fade and die

Fortune's always hiding,
I've looked everywhere
I'm forever blowing bubbles,
Pretty bubbles in the air
United! united!

What about cotton heads driving too slowing causing you to tailgate??? Shouldn't they be fined?

Slowly*

Driving without a seat belt £100
And yes mobile phone ok but what about police officers munching food and swiging on bottles of fizzy drink....plus using your radio....in the car on duty....mobile phones are no different than operating the storno radio one rule for one none for the others usual blue blood tories....oh well back to flogging

yes but only AFTER the police have stopped the vehicle and checked the drivers details. the ANPR does NOT tell the police IF the DRIVER of every vehicle is insured ONLY if there is at LEAST 1 driver insured. which allows certain people to insure a car and allow others to drive it which as its passing the ANPR unit is cleared as insured but when an accident happens and somebody actually checks who was driving it then becomes uninsured.

anyone that passes on the left of you or undertakes when YOU are going straight on and NOT turning right is undertaking and is in the wrong but as stated before as the person who is sat in the right hand lane or not 3 foot away from the curb as said in the highway code is causing the problem they should be prosecuted for driving carelessly not following the lane discipline rules and causing another driver to break the law. that would make the think about sitting in the right hand lane all the way from manchester to rochdale just because they are turning right at the round about

Cant beleive that people here are talking about lane hogging and not about the liability to the public of a person driving wo insurance!!! (if that person cant/wont get insurance there must be a fundamental reason behind it). The fact that person can injure someone who will not be entitled to due compensation/care is surely worth a preventive measure harsher than a 300£ fine and a few points on the license!!

Re lane hogging these are rules I truly dont understand! Call me a bad driver all you want, I have driven manymany miles, If the lane next to me is empty I will happily move over, yet I have seen countless morons that think its safe/good motoring to swing to the slow lane, squeeze in between two cars leaving a few meters of safety distance between each just to follow this silly lane hogging rule. Squeezing in between two cars in the slower lane and messing their minimum distance will force chain breaking, and a little distraction will cause an accident. A highway with cars zigzagging is surely more dangerous than a highway where each lane has a "designated" speed.
Plus, if everyone should drive on the slow lane then what is the use of the fast lane, to overtake someone already in the act of overtaking?

you get double points as a young driver - so the 6 points that you get from no insurance doubles to 12. So the young person with the 'banger car' would be banned from driving for 2 years + the fines and would have to retake the driving test again

This is all very well but it only applies if u do any of these "offences" to or in view of a police car. Can I report a middle lane higher or somebody who Dosnt give way?? Nope

Are people forgetting that 6 points on a new driver... that means goodbye licience and goodbye driving. I think this is enough of a deterrent, as a young driver myself!

its actually easier to drive unisured you get some one to insure the vehicle so its on the database then you can drive past as many anpr units as you like the automatic system will not know you as the driver are not insured

The police allow 10% over the speed limit plus 3mph so that is 80, I hate tossers that are doing 65 in the middle lane then I come up behind them at 75/80mph then have to try get into the outside lane. I think speed limits should be set for each lane, 60 in 1st lane, 80 in middle lane & unlimited in outside lane :)

I can't believe no one can see what the police are upto why is it a 300 pound fine if you get caught driving with no insurance so you can be tempted to do it again and pay 300 again police = cowboys besides if you have a log book you don't own your car dvla do no-one can take your property off you if you genuinely own it yet they can take your car off you and crush it think about it .......

its undertaking only if they pass on the inside and then change out into another lane . ie if theyve used the inside lane only to pass you. ( for example you are in the middle lane when someone approaches you from behind also in the middle lane , they pull into the inside lane pass you and then pull back out into the middle lane) .

Other way around your only allowed 6 points not 12 and when you pass your test again in 2 years time you will still have points on your license to declare to insurer lol how much??? lol

that is not undertaking at all

undertaking (ˈʌndəˌteɪkɪŋ)

1. informal the practice of overtaking on an inner lane a vehicle which is travelling in an outer lane

doesnt matter which lane you or the car is in if you pass it on the nearside (passenger side) that is undertaking such as over taking it passing on the off side (drivers side of a vehicle)

My cousin (bit of a scumbag) is 45 and has never even taken his test, and has driven illegally (No insurance, no M.O.T, no tax, no licence) for years. He's been caught 4 times, and in his words 'All the fines and punishments I've received over the years, haven't even come close to one years insurance. Why am I going to stop?'.

And so, if you're doing the speed limit, and someone comes up behind you wanting to exceed the speed limit, as a police officer you're saying I should commit an SP54 offence - knowingly allowing someone to exceed the motorway speed limit - by moving over and letting them through?

What so all these new fines are acceptable because a few people drive around uninsured -- lemmings - suckered in every time!

Just wait until you accidentally pick the wrong lane and get whallopped with a ticket from some council scumbag watching the roundabout by CCTV - all this is, is just a gateway to more and more draconian driving environments for the everyday man and woman

haha no mate ill give you a scenario...

Im in the middle lane traveling at 68mph, your in the outside fast lane on a motorway traveling at 70mph... you have to break or reduce speed due to someone in front of you traveling slower. If i 'undertake' you because of your braking that IS NOT my fault and you will be what you call 'undertaken'. Thats not breaking the law because what your saying is if the fast lane slams on then we all should?? I have made no maneuver whatsoever.

I didn't mean Nob as in knob that was a typo. I meant to say "No No No." And as for murder not being a crime defined by legislation or under any Statute then you you've missed my point and in a way, proven my point. I said murder is a crime under criminal law! I did not say murder is a crime under legislative statue or Act of Parliament. That is because murder is a real crime, for something to be deemed a crime, there has to be a victim. Read what I said again! Murder is against the law and is a crime under criminal law (not criminal legislation or Act of Parliament, Criminal Law, ie Common Law). Failing to give way at a junction is not against the law, its illegal and an offence committed under the Road Traffic Act, which is a legislative Act of Parliament. Murder = Unlawful act. Failing to give way = Offence defined under Statutory Act as Illegal.

Every thread I read on this subject is full of people calling each other names and saying that people are bad drivers if they think changing lanes is dangerous. It is obviously more dangerous to dart in and out of traffic lanes than to remain in one, otherwise they wouldn't post signs in road works asking people to remain in their lanes! As FAO says below, the law is pretty clear, you should move out to overtake and move back in when not overtaking, where it becomes subjective is when a person has moved out to overtake but then remains in the middle lane because they are fast approaching another car which they would need to pull out to overtake again. Or again, when a driver is approaching a blind entrance ramp coming in from their left, so they move out in advance of the junction so that they are not left pulling emergency maneuvers when they have multiple cars entering the inside lane at 80 and other cars passing them in the middle lane at 90 leaving them no room to react safely. In such instances as these, the new law allows the police to fill their pockets at whim, it doesn't make our roads safer.

Two other worthy points I have seen:

1. By moving over specifically to allow speeding traffic past you are technically committing an offence by aiding and abetting (posted by an honest cop!).

2. The new law quite clearly endorses speeding to a limited extent as it emphasizes the necessity of making space for those who do not keep the law!

Finally, this law makes it quite obvious that instead of concentrating on catching the real criminals on our roads, the innocent can now be targeted for additional finances. At least maybe they will be able to investigate more than 40% of crimes in major cities like Manchester now that they have a little more cash.

Quote... "Murder is an offence under the common law of England and Wales. It is considered the most serious form of homicide, in which one person kills another with the intention to unlawfully cause either death or serious injury. "Unlawfully" means without lawful justification or excuse." End Quote. So, Murder is, as I stated originally, an unlawful act that, when committed, breaks the Common Law of the Land in England & Wales. That was my entire point in the first post. Murder is an unlawful act and anyone who commits homicide is subject to arrest and imprisonment under common law. The law does not say that the man 'unlawfully failed to give way' because he has broken any criminal law, therefore its not an unlawful act he commits. He is accused and said to have committed 'The Offence of failing to give way', which is a breach of the rules of the Road Traffic Act, that in itself being a parliamentary rule which is given the force of Law by the consent of the Governed.

If someone is stupid enough to want to speed past a police officer then that is their choice, the only way you should stop them is to haul them over for speeding. If it is not your jurisdiction to be able to stop them, then you should allow them to continue with their actions and allow the flow of the traffic.
If you are not passing a vehicle then you should be in the 1st lane. If you can see than beyond your safe stopping distance there is a vehicle that you are moving faster than, then you need to look for a safe time to move out into the next lane, then pass the vehicle and move back to the first lane. At no point should you be within your safe stopping distance to another vehicle. At 70mph is this distance is roughly the length of 2 artic trucks!! I hate other drivers coming too close behind me.... If I would ensure I wouldn't get hurt I would brake on just to show them how close is too close!!!

Another thing that annoys me is people changing lanes without checking their blind spots, I drive fast to get past people as quickly as possible to reduce the chance of them pulling out on me. The people who drive fast have their wits about them, drivers trundling along at 50-70mph as in a world of their own and VERY DANGEROUS!!!!

IT IS YOUR FAULT that YOU DROVE YOUR CAR to the left of the person in front of you which is undertaking YES THEY should be in the LEFT hand lane already and thus allow you to OVERTAKE but as your MOTHER will have TOLD you 2 WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT.

you can undertake if both lanes are in a queue and both lane are travelling it is ALLOWED for you to undertake BUT IT IS STILL UNDERTAKING

I give up, i don't you'll ever grasp this.

I give up, i don't think you'll ever grasp this.

you should return to the left hand lane as soon as you are safely passed.........................................................

what more do I have to say learn to read.

My old dad use to pull a trick on people who were up his tailpipe forcing the pace. He used to switch his lights on and off. Manya road hog took it for brake lights in the heat of the moment

Insurance companies are certainly milking average joe knowing they have no choice but to purchase their overrated policies or face the law... Sounds like a form of bullying here?

I dont think YOU will grasp this

TO QUOTE "Undertaking or overtaking on the inside[1][2][3] refers to the practice of overtaking a slower vehicle on a road using the lane that is curb
side of the vehicle being passed; that is to say, a lane to the left of
the vehicle in countries where driving is on the left, or a lane to the
right of the vehicle in countries where driving is on the right (see Right- and left-hand traffic). The practice of undertaking, therefore, may only usually occur on a motorway
or other road where there is more than one lane in the same direction
or when the width of the roads makes this possible (although there may
be exceptions in the cases of contraflow bus lanes)."

It MAY NOT be an offense if the car in the right hand lane is in a queue but that just makes it not an offense doesn't stop it being undertaking. if a car is WRONGFULLY in the middle lane and you pass it in the left hand lane and you BOTH stay in the same lanes as the car on the right is not in a queue (ie your both in slow moving traffic) or turning right then it is an offense.

and I hope the police man agrees with you when you get caught undertaking following your mad interpretation of ENGLISH. words do not come with provisos..

This is from the HIGHWAY CODE

United Kingdom - The Highway Code discourages undertaking on motorways with some exceptions (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.[4] On other roads, the Code advises drivers "should only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right" (rule 163).[5] Rule 163 uses advisory wording and "will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted", but may be used in evidence to establishing liability in any court proceedings.[6] On all roads, undertaking is permitted if the vehicles in the lane to the right are queuing and slow moving. Undertaking in an aggressive or reckless manner could be considered Careless Driving or more seriously Dangerous Driving, both of which are legally enforceable offences.

IT ONLY SAYS IF YOU ARE IN CONGESTED TRAFFIC OR THE CAR IS TURNING RIGHT CAN YOU UNDERTAKE.

it does NOT change the DEFINITION of undertaking just say it is allowed in these circumstances

Do not believe for a second that this is done for " other drivers " or for " safety reasons " All this is exclusively done to fill the COUNCIL POCKETS once more .. Just have a look to the nice city of Bath and see what these criminals at the council do with their cash cow car traps every day at the damage of unaware people and poor tourists. These criminals at the council makes billions a year by slapping unfair fines every 5 minutes. The signage and road markings are INTENTIONALLY left NOT visible and covered by vans or other signage to confuse even more the driver. It is a shameless country the UK ruined by criminals at the council and government.

I don't know we're there getting this double points thing from my friend had 12 point and all he had to do was pass his test again so whoever saying banned for 2 years is rubbish!

The reason why people don't get insured is because it's too expensive in the first place. Everyone needs to drive nowadays so to stop uninsured drivers the insurance premiums need to be drastically reduced. That is the only way you will eradicate uninsured drivers so stop increasing the price of everything because that will not solve anything. .

Again we have the warmongers' the money wasters....spending millions of £ of our hard earned cash on weapons of war. Grabbing every bit of mney they can from the common man and woman, whikst its zionst buddies vodafone etc., get off scot free....Before I even start at local levels of corruption. Council tax, is called a tax to hoodwink us into believing we have to pay this money or we are criminals....well its not against law Common Law. Getting into the wrong lane of a roundabout, £50 fine.....what if we are seen to be chewing gum at the wheel...my goodness...the crime..... What next? What about taxing people who have empty seats whist driving their cars!!!! Are people still so brain dead that they think our wonderful UK Ltd., actually gives a flying buck about it's citizens safety. Cameron wants your money.... to pay the evil greedy psychotic bankers. Wake up for goodness sakes and fcuk our big brother narcissistic scum of an excuse for a government.

Gracious you so need to wake up from your drunken slumber.

What about the people who are in front of you in on the road. The ones who selfishly pull up and then let someone out of the car? What about the people who drive too carefully? Boy do those get on ones nerves.......what about ?............
Wake up guys, 'cos it's gonna get worse.....until you will be frightened to even get into your car.....in case you get fined for not starting the engine quickly enough.....

"For example, murder is a common law crime rather than one established by an Act of Parliament." But then "English and Welsh courts recognise the primacy of statute law over common law where the two overlap." But how can this be when " Judge-made common law operated as the primary source of law for several hundred years, before Parliament acquired legislative powers to create statutory law. It is important to understand that common law is the older and more traditional source of law, and legislative power is simply a layer applied on top of the older common law foundation." If Statutory Law is only able to stand as a law due to being based on Common Law, then how can it supersede the very law that it needs in order to stand as one itself? To use an analogy, every house is built on a foundation. The foundation is the stronghold and basis for everything that is build on it and gives that structure the authority to stand solid. If you then say that the building is now more important and supersedes the very foundation it is using to stand, and if you make the foundation inferior to the building on it and weaken it's authority severely, then if and when that foundation collapses, then so does every single thing built on top of it!

Be also nice if we could have our roads fixed, as fed up swerving to aviod pot holes and damaging my car wheels and suspension.. that is another issue to be resolved in the daily of driving safety.. for us all..

as all this money we pay for our cars to be on the road and yet the roads never get fixed..

you should overtake whatever vehicle & get back into the left lane until the next vehicle comes up. so many times I have had to go straight from left to right as theres an idiot in the middle lane going about 1mph faster than the people in the left lane. yes technically, this is overtaking.. but its also causing inconvenience to other drivers, therefore is 'hogging'. its more of a problem during rush hour & other busy times, than in the middle of the night.. as theres no cars around in the middle of the night.

SP54 Causing Or Permitting SP50

you could NEVER put that to allowing anyone to speed in a DIFFERENT vehicle than one you have NO control over

that is like saying a police officer could prosecute you for allowing a vehicle to smash into your car by driving dangerously......

and actually the wording would actually count more to the person sat in the middle lane forcing the overtaking car to do 80 mph to get past them causing them to speed

As a caravan owner (sorry) I am at times forced to undertake vehicles in the middle lane doing low speeds. I am limited to 60mph but its still faster than some in the middle. I am not allowed in the third lane so have no option but to undertake or cause delays waiting for someone to wake up in the middle lane.

*Nice* :o)

cool lol, mark the mathematician !!

These sound great BUT do they have the police to enforce these new laws?? Or will it encourage the police to enforce these at the expense of solving more serious crimes as it gets them money???

In Guernsey, no insurance results in a driving ban of 1 to 2 years. If you then drive whilst banned, you go to jail.

What of the situation when passing a junction?

If I am in the left hand lane approaching a junction and see busy traffic wanting to enter the motorway, I usually cross into the middle lane to ease their entry to the motorway - technically I am not overtaking at the point I move to the middle lane, however I consider it safer for all concerned to do so!

just read loads of comments previously, about the 3 lane debate and 70mph etc. The middle lane hogging applies to cars constantly in the middle lane when there is an empty inside lane. It's not meant to mean that you can't overtake a stream of traffic in the left hand lane , just move back to the left hand lane when it becomes clear. Simple really !If the left lane is clear and you are in the middle lane then you are hogging it, regardless of the speed of other cars 70mph or more.
I can see others points about 71mph drivers blocking you in,and having to have to slow down yourself because they wont let you into the middle lane to overtake upcoming slow traffic ahead of you in the left lane when they could clearly move to lane 3 to let you out and hence keep traffic moving at constant speeds, hence saving fuel and the likelyhood of jams.

And these fines are to be given out by police who have been seen many times (and pics taken and shown ) breaking the same laws themselves with impunity. police are the worse offenders.

My mum once drove up a motorway the wrong way. Her mum commented that the road seemed a bit busy...

driving without insurance will get you 6 points and if you have passed your test within 2 years you will get it taken away. also if you don't have insurance and drive. your car will be crushed

What about the incorrect use of those damn rear fog lights, especially in driving rain? In all my years on the road I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I used them, and they always went off when someone was behind me.

Trouble is these scrotes who drive uninsured don't give a monkey's about driving banned!

Caused any accidents lately?

And there are some who do it for real for a "laugh" in front of trucks!

And all Beemer drivers!

As you said...

268

Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to
overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

Now if you read that correctly you aren't undertaking because your not weaving in and out... You are just moving with the traffic at its current speed.

NO YOU ARE STILL UNDERTAKING

but in that instance the LAW says you will not be prosecuted for the offense as you as in slow moving traffic.

if you pass a car in the fast lane but stay in the fast lane are you trying to say thats not CALLED OVERTAKING..........

driving on a public road with out an MOT is an not allowed UNLESS your going to a MOT station. either way you would STILL BE DRIVING ON A ROAD WITH OUT MOT whether it is an offense or not.

The law doesn't change the name of actions depending if it is illegal or not.

You've basically just told me what i said is not against the law so well done proving me correct.

"if you pass a car in the fast lane but stay in the fast lane are you trying to say thats not CALLED OVERTAKING.........."

NO... That would be called CRASHING.

IT WOULD ONLY BE CALLED CRASHING if you HIT the car you was UNDERTAKING of ANOTHER OBJECT.

AND YOU ARE NOT CORRECT to say IT IS NOT UNDERTAKING.

it is UNDERTAKING just in that SITUATION YOU ARE ALLOWED to UNDERTAKE........................

you really CANNOT UNDERSTAND ENGLISH.

haha i made you mad.

Hmm, trundling along at say 56mph?? Perhaps you`d feel brave enough to flash your lights behind a traffic patrol car, get them to pull over then explain to them that their normal cruising speed whilst not attending an incident is VERY DANGEROUS ! Stupid woman ! I can tell you just what sort of response you`d get from the officer !

Oh don`t worry they will !! I take it you have never heard of the 10 second attitude test then ?? I can assure you you would most certainly fail it !!

I didn't say that travelling at 56mph is very dangerous, I said the attitude and attention the slow drivers pay to the road is dangerous, like I commented its the slow drivers that pull out without looking in their blind spots.
I love how you as a supposed officer of the law resorted to insults, I take it there's nothing else of my comment you'd like to dispute??? Err no because you know I'm right :)

petepassword: you are the exact type of person this rule is aimed at. The problem with your attitude is that you cause bunching behind you as other vehicles take it in turns to pass on the outside. Regardless of your personal view, you are expected to move back to the left once you have past a slower moving vehicle.

Rule 264 Highway Code

"You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past. Slow-moving or speed-restricted vehicles should always remain in the left-hand lane of the carriageway unless overtaking. You MUST NOT drive on the hard shoulder except in an emergency or if directed to do so by the police, HA traffic officers in uniform or by signs.

Laws MT(E&W)R regs 5, 9 & 16(1)(a), MT(S)R regs 4, 8 & 14(1)(a), and RTA 1988, sects 35 & 186, as amended by TMA 2004 sect 6"
Yes Pete, this rule applies to you too!

And who is going to enforce these new rules... they can't even enforce the rules we already have!!!!!!!!!

I don't think it is a good idea. I once had my rear fog lights on and had the truck driver behind me switch all his lights on and very nearly blinded me.

I am an average safe driver and have been tailgated, cut up, have watched drivers on mobile phones, reading books and maps, hogging the middle lane, hogging the outside lane on a dual carrriage way, ignoring red lights and stop signs, being in the wrong lane on roundabouts etc..etc but I have NEVER seen the police stop any of them! I think I have made my point

More ways to get money out of the British motorist in the disguise of road safety. Despicable. If you want us to stop at red lights then make them work better, I'm not sitting on a roundabout at 3am behind 3 sets of red lights with not another car in sight, turn them off after 10pm, simpletons

sanadrafrog you are writing drivel. Some people behave as you say, most don't. People driving at high illegal speeds frequently are not taking into account all the risks of driving and that make them more dangerous.

same for me on the M25 and M1 and often the north circular

I agree with the HEFTY fines!!!! Government or Police, should adopt the idea like other countries - i.e. MOT & insurance are put on the number plates (it's linked together, although you don't see it?), that way 'hooligan' or 'yobo' drivers can't drive without a number plate. But if they are stupid enough to ignore this, then they 'll get caught, one way or another!!! If the number plates are stolen or 'deliberately' tampered with, it's still registered with the car owner. The youngsters who are driving irrational on the roads (once they've passed their test), who don't give a damn for other motorists, if stopped and fined/points, should do a re-test again, every time they get stopped and fined with points on their licence!! For other motorists who are experienced drivers for many years, the 'youngsters' should listen and learn from 'older' drivers. These days, the 'youngsters' are tooooo......keen to get behind the wheel, once they've passed their test! They only want to show off to their mates that they are better drivers than anybody else!!!!! And these 'boy or girl' racers are just as bad!!! They don't give a hoot for people or the roads, they just want to show off their 'BIG' noisy exhaust pipes, to annoy people! And the exhaust fumes isn't doing any good to the 'ozone' layer or to the people.
You know, I was stopped by a cop three weeks ago, at 11pm 'ish with other half in the car, all because I was going too 'slow' on a 60 national speed road!!! I was in fact going at 40mph, BECAUSE it had been raining and the roads were WET! Now, isn't that a lesson for people like me, or other people who are like me, I was being cautious about driving on wet roads. Although the 60mile speed on the road, says 60, but you don't have to do a 60. Anyway, to the point, the cop asked to see my driving licence, checked it over, and said he had to go out on a call elsewhere. He said, 'did you have a nice evening?' I said 'yes we did thanks! You should go and see the film, called 'We're the Millers.' He smiled and went back to his van. Funnily enough, the cop van trailed us all the way back home, without hassle, back to ther local Police Station. He was pleasant enough. I know the police have to do a few checks at night, but they should stop other louts on the roads, who are getting away with murder!!!!
Hmmm.....I made my point!

Driving in the wrong lane round a roundabout??? what if it is not clearly marked and if you are not familiar with the area even the markings can be confusing i think this one is a bit OTT but the rest i agree with

I am worried at the number of people I still see using mobile phones whilst driving, I really don't think they realise the danger of doing this.

... and if you go to jail the clock should stop ticking on any remaining ban, to restart when you're let out.
... and driving while banned should also add time to the clock rather than running consecutively.

Yet again another way to hit the motorists. All this is take take take from the working man,and there families. We pay more for fuel than any other country,taxes,taxes,taxes,fines,bus lanes,Insurance,Bedroom taxes,What has this country come to??? Read this in the next 20 years there will be a civil unrest in this country we are allowing to many people into the UK,and trying to find money to help pay there cost of living.

All versions of the highway code list the lanes of a motorway as driving (nearside or left hand lane) overtaking lane (centre and outer lanes) what it also states is that you should move to the driving lane if it is safe to do so, therefore if a slower vehicle is being overtaken and there is a clear nearside lane then you move back in, however too many drivers in Britain have the same attitude as you seem to have which is why the government have been forced to take further action. I used to regularly drive from London to Leeds and on numerous occasions could watch the same vehicle driving for dozens of miles of almost clear motorway but they never moved from the centre lane even when overtaking cars who were driving in the outside lane. Sorry but it seems that you have failed to understand the highway code.

Unless responding to an emergency all emergency vehicles, be it police, ambulance, paramedic or fire engine they have to obey the rules of the road, if an unmarked police vehicle is responding to an emergency call it would have flashing blue lights working in the grille of the vehicle.

That response I'm affraid is listed as driving without due care or if the driver behind decided to hit the rear of your car, dangerous driving. When planning a journey I make allowance for delays and holdups, that way I nearly always end up cruising along at about 60mph rather than 70mph, also I find that I use less fuel and feel less stressed plus arrive at my destination early.

Overal I find these so called penalties inadequate, those driving an uninsured or untaxed vehicle should have them impounded then have to witness them being crushed. I have driven all over the world and in my experience there are only a few nations where their drivers are worse than ours, It ios because of this that in this country we have by far the most driving laws. When I first used a UK motorway there was no speed limit but very few people bothered to go much faster than 70mph. For the past twenty years I have been confined to a wheelchair but still drive but nowadays plan my journeys out in advance, Sadly the worst and most prolific offenders on the road are todays cyclists, both motorised and pedal powered, regularly I sit outside a local coffee shop in my home town in west London and on a daily basis watch cyclists commit the most dangerous manouvre that is possible, undertaking a bus that is signalling to turn left and it is only because the bus drivers are observent enough to spot them in time, so that so far Im have seen no cyclist injured but it will happen one day. Near my home is an underground station wirh a mini roundabout immediately outside, the three roads leading off this roundabout all have pedestrian crossings just a few metres from it, so far in the two years that I have lived here I have been hit a total of seven times by cars not noticing me in my wheelchair already on the crossing, forunately so far I have not been injured but every one of those seven cars suffered quite considerable damage as myself and my wheelchair weigh in at almost 200kgs but even so have ended up several metres further down the road, also one motorcyclist had to swerve onto the other side of the road to avoid me and lucky for him that side of the road was empty.

Sponsored Links