Are you unsure about overtaking inc filtering traffic? The answer is:- Perfectly legal when safe to do so. But the duty of care is higher than merely proceeding in a line of traffic. When an accident occurs whilst you are "filtering" passed a stationary/slow moving line of traffic, it is much easier for you to be found partly liable. So be warned........                                                                                                                                                                             

Anybody know how we stand on undertaking?
I always understood it was OK to undertake stationary or very slow moving traffic, so long as it's done safely. Basically so long as it can't be seen as careless or reckless driving.Somebody recently argued with me that this isn't the case, that undertaking is always illegal. So, is it?                                                                                                                                                                             

The Highway code give two Situations when you may undertake someone.   • only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so • stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left.                                                                                                                                                                              

It is legal to undertake.   For instance if you are on an empty motorway and some dork is in the fast lane doing 60mph it is legal to undertake them.   Where the illegality comes in is when you are behind someone doing 60mph in the fast lane and you swerve into the middle lane to undertake them and then swerve back out to the fast lane.   (Opened up a can of worms with this one, played this game before!)   Ratty                                                                                                                                                                               

If you pass the inside of a stationary or slow moving vehicle while you are in the same lane as that vehicle, does the second point apply?Plus the highway code isn't law, some of it is just guidelines. Some sections quote what law applies, while other bits just say that's what you "should" do. For example it says you should keep side junctions clear when you're in traffic, but there's no law saying that.When there is an applicable law it says you MUST NOT do it, but it doesn't say that for undertaking.                                                                                                                                                                             

As GBeldon correctly said the highway code is only an advisory booklet and not law.   Having had this same argument before I could dig out a judge's verdict on an undertaking scenario if anyone is that interested that set a precedence proving in certain circumstances, more in fact than you would expect, undertaking is legal                                                                                                                                                                             

I've just been doing some reading on this.Apparently "nearside overtaking" used to be illegal, but that changed with the 1972 Road Traffic Act, and there is now nothing in law which prohibits it.The big problem is that insurance companies can view it as "contributory negligence", and can hold you responsible if you have an accident. For example a passenger opening a door in front of you can be classed as your fault if you don't stop in time.
I'm guessing the case Rattay is referring to is a criminal case if there was a judge involved, it gets a bit murkier when insurance is involved as it becomes a civil case.                                                                                                                                                                             

Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most  serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’.  In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. An explanation of the abbreviations can be found in 'The road user and the law'. Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see 'The road user and the law') to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’. Taken from Direct.gov                                                                                                                                                                               

sorry not highlighted on purpose just the way in came out.                                                                                                                                                                              

A bit of evidence previously found on this question: In May 2002, when this webs...675 ads.honestjohn.co.ukads.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=53980&m=611450&v=e blogs.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/erinbaker/3653941/Send_middle_lane_hogs_to_Moldova theanswerbank.co.uk/Motoring/Question757564.html                                                                                                                                                                             

Sorry about that, seems there was too much info and it didn't like it!   Ratty                                                                                                                                                                               

Hope this qoute gets through! In May 2002, when this website hadn't even entered the realms of consciousness, I decided to write an email to the Department of Transport, and my best friend, Dave Scott, decided to do the same.Now, we both guessed at departments, because there isn't one entitled 'Division For Motorway Muppetry', and sent our emails on their merry way. Lo and behold, I never heard back from mine. It probably hit the trash icon on a bureaucrat's computer screen or got misdirected to the Ministry of Fishfingers or something. Anyway, Dave did get a reply. And a courteous, thoughtful reply at that. It was sent by a certain 'John Doyle' from 'Road Safety Division 3'. He said: Dear Mr Scott Thank you for your e-mail of 28 May 2002 about lane discipline on our motorways. I have been asked to reply. The Government sympathise with your concern about the standard of driving on our motorways. "Lane hogging" can be very irritating to other drivers, it reduces road capacity, particularly at high flow levels and it is potentially dangerous. However lane hogging is not a specific offence, although it is safe driving practice for vehicles using motorways to remain in the left hand lane unless overtaking as advised in the Highway Code. Failure to comply with the advice in the Highway Code does not in itself constitute an offence (nor would it necessarily be crucial to the outcome of any civil case which might come before the courts). However, anyone involved on such a case would be entitled to point to a failure to heed the Highway Code's advice. It would then be for the court to reach its decision in the light of all the evidence presented to it. Nevertheless The Road Traffic Act 1991 has given police the powers to prosecute people for the offences of dangerous and careless and inconsiderate driving. Overtaking on the left is not an offence in the United Kingdom. However, all drivers are bound by our road traffic laws, and liable to prosecution for offences such as careless or dangerous driving. Enforcement of the law is, of course, a matter for the police who will make their decisions on whether to prosecute in the circumstances of each individual case. My Department will continue to press home the message about good motorway lane discipline through publicity such as our leaflet "A Guide to Safer Motorway Driving". Additionally, signs reading "Keep Left Except When Overtaking" have been erected on some motorways and lane discipline has also been included in police motorway safety campaigns. Yours sincerely                                                                                                                                                                              

Most of that is about passing on the inside while on a motorway and doesn't really relate to the question I originally asked.
As an example of the original point; if you approach a junction with a few cars waiting to pull out, you want to go left and the car at the front is going to go straight on, filtering down the right hand side to go left is going to be dangerous, but going down the left hand side would seem the safer thing to do. Everything I'd heard previously, and everything I've read today says it's fine, but I was recently told it's illegal as it's undertaking.Undertaking lane hogs on the motorway is a whole other issue, and I believe the police will usually class that as careless driving.                                                                                                                                                                             

It's not illegal to move down the left of a queue at a junction. You could do it in a car, if there was room. As previously said, you can undertake on a motorway, if the lanes are travelling at different speeds, but weaving or moving from lane to lane to 'make progress' will certainly result in a 'pull' - assuming someone see's you do it   Thing to remember with any manouvre, in a slightly grey area of the law, is that you will be judged by someone who almost certainly isn't a motorcyclist.   Also, more importantly, when in close proximity to cars, it doesn't matter who's technically right and wrong. It's you that will get hurt.                                                                                                                                                                             

As I understand the law you are  only allowed to undertake when in slow moving traffic or in a one way system under taking a car doing 60 on a motor way if he is drunk or not is not allowed                                                                                                                                                                              

Sh*t! Knew this would happen!   What law do you base your assumption on jpharley?   Ratty                                                                                                                                                                             

Regardless of the legal ramifications of it IMO undertaking at speed is a very unsafe manouver. If a copper sees you do it i'm fairly sure of what his  immediate responce will be.                                                                                                                                                                              

Yet another Quote:  "Highway Code said: 144: Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you. The 'Code defines the standard by which a person's driving is judged under the Road Traffic Act. So acting contrary to the advice/rules in the HC is tantamount in the eyes of the law at minimum to driving without due care . The use of the word dangerous in this particular clause is important. I've certainly had cases in the past where this was held to be dangerous and the offenders got a stretch at Her Majesties God Bless 'Er Pleasure. I could also add that sitting in lane 3 when there is an empty lane two next to you preventing drivers who want to travel faster than you has also been held to be 'driving without insurance' - as most policies specifically prohibit 'pace-setting'. I don't make the rules, I just used to help enforce them. There's nothing wrong with moving to your left either. Undertaking is not an offense in the Road Traffic Act. Under the amended Road Traffic Act (if that hateful new Bill gains assent) you could only be prosecuted for 'without reasonable consideration' if other drivers are 'inconvenienced'. In short, my understanding is that you can undertake as long as you don't force anyone to have to change direction or speed.                                                                                                                                                                             

Mine based on being truck driver for nealy 30 years and its still clean and yes I have just shot myself in the foot for saying the clean word                                                                                                                                                                              

Lets put this to the test rattay next time you see plod traving at 65 in lane 2 pass him on the near side and see what happens lol hope you dont try this cus it will cost you 3 points and a days wages hope to meet you soon mate jp