White lines?

[daktulos]

After the discussion in the cyclist thread, I happened to watch a video on Youtube which reminded me of something I've been wondering for a while. Here's a still from it:

https://i.postimg.cc/Dw3WWD7f/Screenshot-2020-06-03-at-09-00-04.png (https://postimages.org/)

The road markings aren't clear, but it's a double-white line on the corner. I don't want to talk about the safety of the riding (it actually made me feel quite uncomfortable and sorry for the Bentley driver), but rather the legality of it.

While the helmet camera is clearly over the white lines, it's entirely possible that the wheels aren't. I remember hearing (but I've no idea when/where) that any part of a vehicle overhanging the nearest white line would be illegal. I can completely understand why this makes sense.

But I've also heard that it's OK to ride on the solid white line of a bus lane, and it's the wheels which are important there.

Does anyone know if details like this are written in law, is it case law, or is it up to the police/etc. to use their judgement (e.g. consider it dangerous driving).

Thanks.

[Chris_SVS]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9/made

subject to sub-paragraph (5), every vehicle proceeding on any length of road along which the marking has been so placed, as viewed in the direction of travel of the vehicle, a continuous line is on the left of a broken line or of another continuous line, must be so driven as to keep the first-mentioned continuous line on the right hand or off side of the vehicle.

Essentially, wide handlebars, mirrors or panniers (the widest point of a bike) cannot cross a solid white.

The riding in the above video is clearly questionable, could I have a link please.

[daktulos]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9/made



Essentially, wide handlebars, mirrors or panniers (the widest point of a bike) cannot cross a solid white.

The riding in the above video is clearly questionable, could I have a link please.
Cheers - I need to work out the bus lane one now, but I suspect it's just leeway given before the CCTV operators issue a fine.

I'll PM you a link,

[Grant66]

If it's anything like tennis then on the line counts as being in (with the bus lane being out).

Can't see anything in the act or regulation that describes what the definition of crossing is though, but they should see a visible gap to get a conviction. No mention of straddling on single white lines.

The law does mention straddling in regard to double whites. Which, if taken from the dictionary definition of straddle, means that you are (not necessarily on the ground) on both sides of the line at the same time.

So, yes if your helmet is over the line and the bike isn't you're breaking rule 129.

Sent from an S20 using Tapatalk with that kin cr4p blocked

[Dave20046]

I can only imagine that our esteemed biker friend is overtaking three cyclists and has neither brakes nor eyes equipped. :smt046


As has been said above... but it did make me think of something I've been meaning to look up recently. There's a trade off on risk, re. space available etc etc, but when filtering for example standstill traffic I was of the opinion you could overtake in the same lane if safe to do so (even on solid white as long as you don't cross it).
In trying to google the wording I found this video ...which should definitely be discouraged and makes me want to find wording that clarifies exactly what is allowed even more! :smt107
-I8mGtgd0Y0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I8mGtgd0Y0

Have a good cringe.
Side note, f00k knows what the rider was doing, I cna only imagine he took that line because the car was already doing it...or perhaps he cut up the car and there was never any gap there at all? Though it sort of looks clear from his shoulder check , maybe that's why he only indicated for a split second.

[Chris_SVS]

The rider moves lane to avoid conflict with the oncoming HGV that's about to merge at speed. Good practice, what isn't good practice there is hanging out at the centre line. Take a more dominant road position away from the HGV.

It's hard to tell with the overtake if it was anything really to do with the rider, or purely deliberate. The road you can see via the camera looks clear during the shoulder check and the cars lights are visible in the mirror for a few seconds after, preceeding the squeeze.

[daktulos]

I can only imagine that our esteemed biker friend is overtaking three cyclists and has neither brakes nor eyes equipped. :smt046

:cool:

As has been said above... but it did make me think of something I've been meaning to look up recently. There's a trade off on risk, re. space available etc etc, but when filtering for example standstill traffic I was of the opinion you could overtake in the same lane if safe to do so (even on solid white as long as you don't cross it).

I think if it's a stationary vehicle, you can cross the line - but I would think twice as the rule is no doubt intended for parked cars, not bypassing a queue.

In trying to google the wording I found this video ...which should definitely be discouraged and makes me want to find wording that clarifies exactly what is allowed even more! :smt107

Have a good cringe.

Oh my god! That's horrendous. It's why bikers should dominate their lane, and why learners should have more mandatory training. It's also exactly the same reason why cycl... never mind.

The car driver is clearly driving dangerously, but if it had been a safe pass (e.g. a motorcyclist intentionally giving up position to allow another motorcyclist to pass in the same lane) would it have been legal?

[Chris_SVS]

:cool:
The car driver is clearly driving dangerously, but if it had been a safe pass (e.g. a motorcyclist intentionally giving up position to allow another motorcyclist to pass in the same lane) would it have been legal?
Giving up position to allow another motorcyclist to pass in the same lane isn't illegal in any sense I can recall. Or indeed, is passing another motorcyclist in the same lane.

Could perhaps argue that HC 163 would apply re giving as much space as you would when overtaking a car, this is advisory though

[daktulos]

Giving up position to allow another motorcyclist to pass in the same lane isn't illegal in any sense I can recall.

I guess that makes sense, as it's what happens on single-carriageways.

[Chris_SVS]

My editor was funky there, was hiding quotes :(

Im not sure there's one single answer though, your positioning when overtaking is really governed by what you're going to be passing and where it is.

FWIW: I have no problem passing motorcyclists in the same lane if their position allows, similarly I have no problem with dangling a foot to be passed myself - I generally don't if there's oncoming vehicles as it would put me too close to those, but any other time there's probably little reason to be using the offside lane.

[Dave20046]

Oh my god! That's horrendous. It's why bikers should dominate their lane, and why learners should have more mandatory training. It's also exactly the same reason why cycl... never mind.
haha! Take it to the other thread, I of course have a robust and rational argument in my pocket.


The car driver is clearly driving dangerously, but if it had been a safe pass (e.g. a motorcyclist intentionally giving up position to allow another motorcyclist to pass in the same lane) would it have been legal?
That's my query really. I'm pretty sure it is , one being because I'm certain I've seen a bikecop do it on solid whites...but I've also seen them do 100mph in a 40 :smt102 I can't seem to recall or find the bit of highway code though.

[Dave20046]

Giving up position to allow another motorcyclist to pass in the same lane isn't illegal in any sense I can recall. Or indeed, is passing another motorcyclist in the same lane.

Could perhaps argue that HC 163 would apply re giving as much space as you would when overtaking a car, this is advisory though




That's what I was thinking and therefore presumably applies to motorbikes passing cars too.

[Chris_SVS]

That's what I was thinking and therefore presumably applies to motorbikes passing cars too.
You're into filtering territory there really, which is in essence still an overtake at much lower speeds vs slow moving or stationary vehicles.

[Bibio]

After the discussion in the cyclist thread, I happened to watch a video on Youtube which reminded me of something I've been wondering for a while. Here's a still from it:

https://i.postimg.cc/Dw3WWD7f/Screenshot-2020-06-03-at-09-00-04.png (https://postimages.org/)



Thanks.


who ever is riding that bike needs to take advanced lessons on how to ride.... that is furking shocking. if that car was a bus or lorry they would be dead. right bend~left side, left bend~right side.. always. its easy to go fast and cut corners it takes great skill to ride fast safely and properly.

[Chris_SVS]

who ever is riding that bike needs to take advanced lessons on how to ride.... that is furking shocking. if that car was a bus or lorry they would be dead. right bend~left side, left bend~right side.. always. its easy to go fast and cut corners it takes great skill to ride fast safely and properly.
Awful but common riding that prioritises speed over safety and the shorter + faster racing line over vision.

He's riding a nice bike but also riding his luck

[Grant66]

Did we get the link to the original video?

Sent from an S20 using Tapatalk with that kin cr4p blocked

[daktulos]

I didn't post the video as I didn't want it to just be about the riding ... but here it is, anyway.

w5M_rbXESik

[DJ123]

I think if it's a stationary vehicle, you can cross the line - but I would think twice as the rule is no doubt intended for parked cars, not bypassing a queue.



i've always followed the rule of stationary vehicle for which you can include vehicles in a traffic jam. Never had any issues filtering past Police Cars on solid white lines who are stuck in a traffic jam.
So long as you are doing it when it is safe, there is no issue - as with any overtake it is your responsibility as the rider/driver to ensure the overtake is safe.

[Bibio]

I didn't post the video as I didn't want it to just be about the riding ... but here it is, anyway.

w5M_rbXESik
weirdly the person is riding sort of properly apart from KEEPING a line round bends. trying to carry speed rather than keeping safe.

[redtrummy]

My understanding is that you can cross double white lines to overtake traffic moving less than 10mph. It was a long time ago I read it somewhere so might have been revised

[R1ffR4ff]

My understanding is that you can cross double white lines to overtake traffic moving less than 10mph. It was a long time ago I read it somewhere so might have been revised

Seems you are pretty much right,

https://www.uk-driving-test.com/double-white-lines.php

HTH :)

[daktulos]

Seems you are pretty much right,

https://www.uk-driving-test.com/double-white-lines.php

HTH :)

But only for specific vehicle types, not general traffic. You can also cross a line to pass a stationary vehicle, but I've no idea if that includes queueing traffic or just parked cars (not that cars are allowed to park there).

[Dave20046]

But only for specific vehicle types, not general traffic. You can also cross a line to pass a stationary vehicle, but I've no idea if that includes queueing traffic or just parked cars (not that cars are allowed to park there).

And you can pass moving traffic in the same lane on solid whites if safe to do so and no part of you crosses the line.

[BoltonSte]

But only for specific vehicle types, not general traffic. You can also cross a line to pass a stationary vehicle, but I've no idea if that includes queueing traffic or just parked cars (not that cars are allowed to park there).


From the Ex GMP motorcycle instructor - Stationary vehicles does not include queuing traffic (that comes under filtering).


Ste

[Bibio]

this is white lines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsTJaP2tC0A

[Red Herring]

Been sitting here watching this thread with interest as this is one of my pet subjects that I regularly get asked about and it's good to get a reminder sometimes what the common understanding is.

The rules we are talking about here are under Regulation 26 of the The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. Here's a link if you want to read it in full.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regulation/26/made

Just to clarify a couple of points raised, the rules say the white line must be kept to the right or offside of the vehicle so technically if any part of the vehicle is overhanging the line then that would be illegal unless one of the exceptions apply. From a practical point of view the vast majority of coppers will be looking at your wheels and they need to stay to the left of the nearest line, so not on or over it. Obviously if you have super wide panniers and take an oncoming police cars wing mirror off with them then you might expect a different point of view......

No you can't overtake any vehicle travelling less than 10mph. It has to be a road maintenance vehicle and it has to be displaying the appropriate sign, which is basically a keep right sign (think road sweeper).

Yes you can cross a solid white line to pass a stationery vehicle, but be very carful because that can be a minefield!

Without starting a whole new debate you need to appreciate there is a difference between Traffic Law, which is passed by government, and Traffic Lore, which is basically a policeman understanding of it..... Traffic Lore comes about through policemen doing something a certain way and it getting passed along the line by successive generations. The difficulty in this instance comes about through their interpretation of the word "necessary".

Paragraph (2)(b) is the one that says you must keep the solid line on the right.

The wording of paragraph 6 is....

Nothing in paragraph (2)(b) shall be taken to prohibit a vehicle from being driven across, or so as to straddle, the continuous line referred to in that paragraph, if it is safe to do so and if necessary to do so—

It then lists the reasons you can do so and the second one is "in order to pass a stationery vehicle".

So basically you can cross the solid white line if it is safe and necessary to pass a stationery vehicle. Now read that paragraph again. Is it saying you can do it if it is necessary to cross the line in order to pass the vehicle, or is it saying you can only do it if it is necessary to pass the vehicle?

Now the legislation actually makes it illegal to stop within a solid white line system except in certain cases, for example to set down and pick up a person or to load or unload (amongst others). Having made provision for a vehicle to be allowed to stop it follows that they had to provide opportunity for other traffic to go around them, hence Paragraph 6, otherwise you would have to sit there until they had finished loading etc etc.... This has led to the police view that you can only cross the white line to go around a vehicle that is stopped for one of the purposes listed, and as queuing traffic isn't one of them...... They support this argument by saying it isn't necessary to pass queuing traffic as it will move off shortly and therefore you don't need to pass it..... there interpretation of the word necessary being applied to the need to pass the vehicle.

Those that argue for the other interpretation say that the word necessary applies to the need to cross the white line. Can you get past the stationery vehicle without crossing the white line? If you can then you do not need to cross it and to do so would be illegal, if you do need to cross it then it would not be. Fairly simple really.

Lets put that into a practical scenario to make it easier to understand. You are following a bus and it stops to pick up passengers. There is a solid white line but you can see right past the bus and there is nothing coming the other way. It is safe for you to pull out and go around the bus so you do so, all perfectly legal according to the legislation and most police officers.

Now you are following the same bus but there is a car ahead of you between you and the bus. The bus stops and the car driver, being a car driver and totally ignorant of all things related to traffic law let alone the need to look beyond the end of their bonnet, stops right up the bus's bum where they can't see a thing. You on the other hand being a switched on biker have hung back a bit and have a great view past them both. Nothing coming, perfectly safe to pass, so you do so (obviously taking lots of care in case the kid that just got off the bus runs out in front of it...). Legal or not? In the eyes of the police not, because the car behind the bus was queuing and you didn't need to pass. That's how stupid their argument is.

The problem with arguments and views like this is they are allowed to spread. Take the IAM for example, supposedly our leading civilian organization on all things advanced about driving and riding. They have provided plenty of jobs for ex coppers, including your truly, and some of them are the people setting their standards. Guess which view they hold around white lines? I've had numerous rows with them over this particular topic and when you hit them with the kind of logic I have used here they just repeat that "queuing traffic isn't stationery for the purposes of this legislation". They even paid a barrister to come up with a legal argument to support their view but what they produced wouldn't be worth the price of a cup of tea.......

For the record I should say right now I'm not a solicitor, lawyer, barrister or any other kind of individual who makes a living out of lying. I was however a copper for more years than I care to remember and I've torn up more prosecution files handed to me by eager traffic officers than I really should have.....

So much for my brief post..... Guys, there are two pieces of legislation that you, as motorcyclists, should know backwards. One is white lines for all the reasons I've just given, the other is around overtaking on pedestrian crossings. I don't want to be rude but it amazes me just how ignorant people can be of some basic traffic law, especially when there are so many opportunities to exploit it to your advantage if you know your stuff. I've had people presenting for advanced tests who don't know the basics, there really is no excuse.

Cheers, stay safe out there.

[daktulos]

Cheers, stay safe out there.

Thanks for this, it was a really good read and it really helps to know the police point of view, as that's what sort of matters in reality.

I hadn't spotted the ambiguity with the "necessary" wording. I don't think I have ever filtered past queueing traffic on a solid white line, while I take your point about the bus, there is a danger of the car driver pulling out as you overtake - but that can happen with moving traffic, too.

Given everything you've said, I'm not going to change anything, but I may use my instinct ;) if the situation dictates.

[Chris_SVS]

One of a few things I dislike about IAM is the ease at which things can be changed to suit.

Hold throttle open and quickshift up - not showing enough restraint or mechanical sympathy

Literally stuck behind two 4x4s towing trailers on a stretch of road with zero overtaking opportunity, there was never the time or space to perform the overtake safely (the examiner said he would have been long gone) - not making enough progress.

Tear on fella, it's my bike, my insurance and my life..

Overtaking HGV on motorway with another HGV well in the distance, do all the things and move back to lane 1 (as per Highway code) - that was wrong too...

[Dave20046]

Been sitting here watching this thread with interest as this is one of my pet subjects that I regularly get asked about and it's good to get a reminder sometimes what the common understanding is.

The rules we are talking about here are under Regulation 26 of the The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. Here's a link if you want to read it in full.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regulation/26/made

Just to clarify a couple of points raised, the rules say the white line must be kept to the right or offside of the vehicle so technically if any part of the vehicle is overhanging the line then that would be illegal unless one of the exceptions apply. From a practical point of view the vast majority of coppers will be looking at your wheels and they need to stay to the left of the nearest line, so not on or over it. Obviously if you have super wide panniers and take an oncoming police cars wing mirror off with them then you might expect a different point of view......

No you can't overtake any vehicle travelling less than 10mph. It has to be a road maintenance vehicle and it has to be displaying the appropriate sign, which is basically a keep right sign (think road sweeper).

Yes you can cross a solid white line to pass a stationery vehicle, but be very carful because that can be a minefield!

Without starting a whole new debate you need to appreciate there is a difference between Traffic Law, which is passed by government, and Traffic Lore, which is basically a policeman understanding of it..... Traffic Lore comes about through policemen doing something a certain way and it getting passed along the line by successive generations. The difficulty in this instance comes about through their interpretation of the word "necessary".

Paragraph (2)(b) is the one that says you must keep the solid line on the right.

The wording of paragraph 6 is....

Nothing in paragraph (2)(b) shall be taken to prohibit a vehicle from being driven across, or so as to straddle, the continuous line referred to in that paragraph, if it is safe to do so and if necessary to do so—

It then lists the reasons you can do so and the second one is "in order to pass a stationery vehicle".

So basically you can cross the solid white line if it is safe and necessary to pass a stationery vehicle. Now read that paragraph again. Is it saying you can do it if it is necessary to cross the line in order to pass the vehicle, or is it saying you can only do it if it is necessary to pass the vehicle?

Now the legislation actually makes it illegal to stop within a solid white line system except in certain cases, for example to set down and pick up a person or to load or unload (amongst others). Having made provision for a vehicle to be allowed to stop it follows that they had to provide opportunity for other traffic to go around them, hence Paragraph 6, otherwise you would have to sit there until they had finished loading etc etc.... This has led to the police view that you can only cross the white line to go around a vehicle that is stopped for one of the purposes listed, and as queuing traffic isn't one of them...... They support this argument by saying it isn't necessary to pass queuing traffic as it will move off shortly and therefore you don't need to pass it..... there interpretation of the word necessary being applied to the need to pass the vehicle.

Those that argue for the other interpretation say that the word necessary applies to the need to cross the white line. Can you get past the stationery vehicle without crossing the white line? If you can then you do not need to cross it and to do so would be illegal, if you do need to cross it then it would not be. Fairly simple really.

Lets put that into a practical scenario to make it easier to understand. You are following a bus and it stops to pick up passengers. There is a solid white line but you can see right past the bus and there is nothing coming the other way. It is safe for you to pull out and go around the bus so you do so, all perfectly legal according to the legislation and most police officers.

Now you are following the same bus but there is a car ahead of you between you and the bus. The bus stops and the car driver, being a car driver and totally ignorant of all things related to traffic law let alone the need to look beyond the end of their bonnet, stops right up the bus's bum where they can't see a thing. You on the other hand being a switched on biker have hung back a bit and have a great view past them both. Nothing coming, perfectly safe to pass, so you do so (obviously taking lots of care in case the kid that just got off the bus runs out in front of it...). Legal or not? In the eyes of the police not, because the car behind the bus was queuing and you didn't need to pass. That's how stupid their argument is.

The problem with arguments and views like this is they are allowed to spread. Take the IAM for example, supposedly our leading civilian organization on all things advanced about driving and riding. They have provided plenty of jobs for ex coppers, including your truly, and some of them are the people setting their standards. Guess which view they hold around white lines? I've had numerous rows with them over this particular topic and when you hit them with the kind of logic I have used here they just repeat that "queuing traffic isn't stationery for the purposes of this legislation". They even paid a barrister to come up with a legal argument to support their view but what they produced wouldn't be worth the price of a cup of tea.......

For the record I should say right now I'm not a solicitor, lawyer, barrister or any other kind of individual who makes a living out of lying. I was however a copper for more years than I care to remember and I've torn up more prosecution files handed to me by eager traffic officers than I really should have.....

So much for my brief post..... Guys, there are two pieces of legislation that you, as motorcyclists, should know backwards. One is white lines for all the reasons I've just given, the other is around overtaking on pedestrian crossings. I don't want to be rude but it amazes me just how ignorant people can be of some basic traffic law, especially when there are so many opportunities to exploit it to your advantage if you know your stuff. I've had people presenting for advanced tests who don't know the basics, there really is no excuse.

Cheers, stay safe out there.
Love it when RH wades in.

Pop quiz on ped. (the bad kind not the worst kind) crossings...you can filter the queue up until the vehicle closest to the crossing? A lot of people say you can't do it at all but I've always understood it to be the above in basic terms.

It's pretty clear why, but I recently saw a Kermit on a Ninja filter right next to the front vehicle (which was a van!). Light turns amber, the green power ranger is pretty much on his back wheel...the van doesn't move because a disabled person is still crossing and just appears into the bike's view as his throttle hits fully open:smt073

[Dave20046]

One of a few things I dislike about IAM is the ease at which things can be changed to suit.

Hold throttle open and quickshift up - not showing enough restraint or mechanical sympathy

Literally stuck behind two 4x4s towing trailers on a stretch of road with zero overtaking opportunity, there was never the time or space to perform the overtake safely (the examiner said he would have been long gone) - not making enough progress.

Tear on fella, it's my bike, my insurance and my life..

Overtaking HGV on motorway with another HGV well in the distance, do all the things and move back to lane 1 (as per Highway code) - that was wrong too...

Depending on the distance (but sounds like it's far enough) and what's around me (particularly behind) I'd be back in lane 1 too.

[Red Herring]

Love it when RH wades in.

Pop quiz on ped. (the bad kind not the worst kind) crossings...you can filter the queue up until the vehicle closest to the crossing? A lot of people say you can't do it at all but I've always understood it to be the above in basic terms.

....

Cheers Dave, I try not to sound like a know it all but it would be a shame to let all the rubbish the public spent a fortune teaching me over the years go completely to waste now I've been put out to pasture....

Yes about right on crossings, it's the one closest to the crossing within the zig zags on the approach that's important. If it's moving, or stationery for the purpose of giving way to a pedestrian, then you must let them go over the line of studs first. The bit about being stationery for the purpose of giving way to a pedestrian gets forgotten by lots, so if it's in a traffic jam and only not moving because the car in front is in the way then technically you can filter on past. Obviously common sense should prevail and you need to make sure you can see if someone might walk out cos pedestrians tend not to look to well if they think everything is stopped, so don't go flying up the outside on the back wheel......

[Dave20046]

Cheers Dave, I try not to sound like a know it all but it would be a shame to let all the rubbish the public spent a fortune teaching me over the years go completely to waste now I've been put out to pasture....

Yes about right on crossings, it's the one closest to the crossing within the zig zags on the approach that's important. If it's moving, or stationery for the purpose of giving way to a pedestrian, then you must let them go over the line of studs first. The bit about being stationery for the purpose of giving way to a pedestrian gets forgotten by lots, so if it's in a traffic jam and only not moving because the car in front is in the way then technically you can filter on past. Obviously common sense should prevail and you need to make sure you can see if someone might walk out cos pedestrians tend not to look to well if they think everything is stopped, so don't go flying up the outside on the back wheel......
See that is forgotten . I’d not had that interpretation in my head, was just that cautious of them I’d tuck in last car behind the zigzags on all occasions. This is why I like these discussions even if I sound like a dork- it’s good to learn and glean bits and bats

[Bibio]

I can only imagine that our esteemed biker friend is overtaking three cyclists and has neither brakes nor eyes equipped. :smt046


As has been said above... but it did make me think of something I've been meaning to look up recently. There's a trade off on risk, re. space available etc etc, but when filtering for example standstill traffic I was of the opinion you could overtake in the same lane if safe to do so (even on solid white as long as you don't cross it).
In trying to google the wording I found this video ...which should definitely be discouraged and makes me want to find wording that clarifies exactly what is allowed even more! :smt107
-I8mGtgd0Y0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I8mGtgd0Y0

Have a good cringe.
Side note, f00k knows what the rider was doing, I cna only imagine he took that line because the car was already doing it...or perhaps he cut up the car and there was never any gap there at all? Though it sort of looks clear from his shoulder check , maybe that's why he only indicated for a split second.
wow just watched that.. what most riding schools dont teach is command of the road nor do many people know how to do it properly. give another motorist an inch and they will take a mile.


tbh for a car to overtake like that the bike must have been ridden by a granny on smack..


a biker is not always in the right.

[daktulos]

tbh for a car to overtake like that the bike must have been ridden by a granny on smack..

It looked like they were doing about 62mph, so I can understand the frustration of the driver, but that overtake was criminal.

[BoltonSte]

There is something odd going on. The car appears in the mirror within 1 second of crossing into lane 2. Could be they were in lane 1 as well at the beginning of the manoeuvre.


Doesn't justify squeezing past like that though.


Ste