# The disease is spreading



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

I am sure that middle lane hogging has been debated to death, but about 50% of my commute to work and back involve a outside lane hogger. Normally I pull up behind them and give them a gentle flash to remind them they have been sat dozing in the overtaking lane (with 2 clear inside lanes free) for quite some time now. They normally spring into action with a flick of the signal and swerve into the middle lane to take up their normal stance of middle lane hogging.

Well not today. Gave them a quick flash - and no response. So waited and waited to no avail - they must have been in a coma to not have noticed me. They were doing 73mph by the way with 2 clear inside lanes. So I decided to put my foot down and undertake. Not something I would normally do, but I had room to pull into the inside lane if he woke up and pulled into my lane. Anyway - just I put my foot down to undertake the sleeper as quickly as possibly, but they decided to put their foot down. Not sure what was funnier; that they thought their 1.6 family saloon was going to be quick enough to outpace my car, or the fact that he wasn't dozing but just being plain stubborn. :roll:

So undertook and then pulled into the overtaking lane again. This was followed by a tirade of flashes and signals (once they had caught up to me that is). About 5mins of flashing was beginning to p*ss me off, so stuck on the rear fogs and then disappeared.

They are probably at home bitching about the mad the Audi driver who dared to flash them and then proceed to undertake. I'm not an aggressive driver, but I got annoyed when some-one was clearly not paying attention thought they were massive victims. They were so unaware of the cars around them, they are probably the kind of people who drive into other people's cars, and then think they are the victims!

I hate inconsiderate people, but even worse I hate unapologetic arrogant people.


----------



## Hoggy (May 8, 2002)

Hi, I sort of agree, but why under take & change to the outside lane, when going slower than following traffic, you are just as bad. If you are going to overtake, then keep travelling faster than the following traffic, within reason or change lane.








Hoggy.


----------



## SalsredTT (Jan 8, 2011)

Oh dear - you obviously made the mistake of thinking that you could go into the BMW lane!!

Seriously though - I swear some people drive around with their heads up their arses. A car followed me home Saturday night at about 9.30 p.m. without a SINGLE light on ........ where was Plod?? Hmmm sat dozing off somewhere waiting for someone to exceed the speed limit by 11% no doubt.

Don't think its just drivers either - seems everyone is selfish and nasty these days - thats certainly a disease that is spreading.

Ohhh and your other mistake??? Oh yea - that old chestnut - being a girlie driving a decent car!!


----------



## davelincs (Jan 1, 2010)

I agree with you 100% girl smiffy, i had the same about 2 months ago, but they were doing about 65mph, in the outside lane,there is nothing worse,i am sure what you say ,some drivers never look in the mirrors


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

Hoggy said:


> Hi, I sort of agree, but why under take & change to the outside lane, when going slower than following traffic, you are just as bad. If you are going to overtake, then keep travelling faster than the following traffic, within reason or change lane.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I had to get back into the outer lane, as I had to go at such a pelt to overtake him quickly that I caught up the car in the middle lane. So pulled into the outside lane and drove off, until I caught up some traffic at which point I slowed down to a sensible speed. This is when they caught me up - not because I slowed down on purpose to p*ss them off.


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

Hoggy - liking your motorway sign - need them up on the M3 first I think


----------



## Hoggy (May 8, 2002)

Hi Girl Smiffy, Poor anticipation as well then. :wink: :wink:  
Hoggy.


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

Hoggy said:


> Hi Girl Smiffy, Poor anticipation as well then. :wink: :wink:
> Hoggy.


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

Girl Smiffy said:


> Hoggy said:
> 
> 
> > Hi, I sort of agree, but why under take & change to the outside lane, when going slower than following traffic, you are just as bad. If you are going to overtake, then keep travelling faster than the following traffic, within reason or change lane.
> ...


now i would have slowed down and speeded up just to miff him off......mans gotta have fun somewhere lol


----------



## Hoggy (May 8, 2002)

gazzer1964 said:


> now i would have slowed down and speeded up just to miff him off......mans gotta have fun somewhere lol


Hi, Fair enough, as long as you don't complain about lane hoggers.
Hoggy.


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

Hoggy said:


> gazzer1964 said:
> 
> 
> > now i would have slowed down and speeded up just to miff him off......mans gotta have fun somewhere lol
> ...


wont catch me posting on it m8ee......law says 70 so i cant moan if doing 73 can i lol


----------



## AudiDoDatDen (Aug 28, 2010)

So not only speeding but undertaking too. No wonder there are so many crashes. Suppose this 'dozing' driver didn't react quickly enough and slammed into your rear. Who would be at fault I wonder :roll: :roll:


----------



## Rustytt (Mar 24, 2009)

Yeah, it's all very well quoting the law whilst hanging round a high performance car forum, but the reality is these dopey gumbos are a hindrance to smooth progress on the motorways where the reality is speed limits were set fifty years ago when the number of cars was 20% of what it is today & they were all ford Anglias puttering around at 45 bhp.

80mph is the norm on the motorway, we all know it, we all know that speed in itself is not dangerous, where the problem lies is with innatentive and inconsiderate drivers who use the road poorly, hindering the progress of following drivers. I have no problem with a safe undertake if some fucking moron refuses to move over to allow a faster car to pass. And to answer your question, in the rear end, the car behind would be responsible end of & right too. Some people should just get a buss pass, it would be safer all round.


----------



## richieshore (May 17, 2010)

Rustytt said:


> Yeah, it's all very well quoting the law whilst hanging round a high performance car forum, but the reality is these dopey gumbos are a hindrance to smooth progress on the motorways where the reality is speed limits were set fifty years ago when the number of cars was 20% of what it is today & they were all ford Anglias puttering around at 45 bhp.
> 
> 80mph is the norm on the motorway, we all know it, we all know that speed in itself is not dangerous, where the problem lies is with innatentive and inconsiderate drivers who use the road poorly, hindering the progress of following drivers. I have no problem with a safe undertake if some fucking moron refuses to move over to allow a faster car to pass. And to answer your question, in the rear end, the car behind would be responsible end of & right too. Some people should just get a buss pass, it would be safer all round.


Couldn't agree more, in fact it was the dozy twat that would've caused the accident as he was what forced the OP into having to speed and undertake! People really need to learn to drive.


----------



## Charlie (Dec 15, 2006)

All too common unfortunately, idiots causing frustration which then results in misjudged behaviour which potentially results in an accident :-(

Charlie


----------



## AudiDoDatDen (Aug 28, 2010)

richieshore said:


> Rustytt said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, it's all very well quoting the law whilst hanging round a high performance car forum, but the reality is these dopey gumbos are a hindrance to smooth progress on the motorways where the reality is speed limits were set fifty years ago when the number of cars was 20% of what it is today & they were all ford Anglias puttering around at 45 bhp.
> ...


So a car travelling at the speed limit in lane 3, not the overtaking lane as there is no such thing, is responsible for not only, I suspect, tailgating but a dangerous undertake probably in excess of 90mph and then has to cut back into lane 3 to avoid hitting a car I lane 2 is ok then. As for forcing the op to drive like this well they must have been pointing a gun at to cause dangerous driving. 
The car behind would not be responsible for an incident if I were a witness to such appalling driving.

My licence is clean and covers LGV1, PCV, ADR Hazchem, bike and numerous other licences, the amount of time I've been late home because some idiot has been driving like a tosser and caused a crash is ridicous. Oh and it's a bus pass :roll:


----------



## Rustytt (Mar 24, 2009)

You missed the misspelling of inattentive if that's what you need to show your superiority. :roll:

You present an inherently unsafe scenario and ask me to approve of it? You must be kidding. Congratulations on all your licences. Whilst you were sweating behind the wheel of your HGV, I was taking a degree in transport management & ended up running operations for TDG at several sites, telling drivers what to do all day - over to you!


----------



## richieshore (May 17, 2010)

If a car is driving in the outside lane or the middle lane when the lane to the left of them is completely free then I would call that bad driving. Everything else is irrelevant. If they are sitting in the outside lane causing a build up of traffic and thus causing someone to undertake then in my opinion they are in the wrong and they are the cause of that undertake and thus the cause of any potential accident that precedes it, purely going on the fact that if they weren't in that lane the undertaking would've never taken place and everybody would've been happy.

A little bit like little old ladies doing 15mph along country lanes are in my opinion the cause of the accident if someone has to overtake them and ends up having one!

This is all just in my opinion, I'm sure that technically and legally they are probably well within their rights to drive along like this but just because it's okay doesn't mean it's right.


----------



## AudiDoDatDen (Aug 28, 2010)

Rustytt said:


> You missed the misspelling of inattentive if that's what you need to show your superiority. :roll:
> 
> You present an inherently unsafe scenario and ask me to approve of it? You must be kidding. Congratulations on all your licences. Whilst you were sweating behind the wheel of your HGV, I was taking a degree in transport management & ended up running operations for TDG at several sites, telling drivers what to do all day - over to you!


I wonder if your MD would like to see a copy of your posts condoning dangerous driving, just a thought. Don't kid yourself that your drivers take any notice of you once they've left the depot :roll:


----------



## Rustytt (Mar 24, 2009)

I am the M.D. now, but nice try with the threat!!

You're right though, drivers with that attitude - presumably you're one of them since you brought it up - exist in any company. They never lasted, particularly since telemetry came along.


----------



## AudiDoDatDen (Aug 28, 2010)

Don't last you say, well I've been in my current job for over 10 years and drive a £250,000 truck with a 55t crane that is tracked to the hilt, it's arrogant transport managers that don't last, we had one about six years ago so a considerable number of us threatened to leave, he didn't last long :lol: The guy we have now is great and gets on well with everyone.


----------



## Dash (Oct 5, 2008)

AudiDoDatDen said:


> So a car travelling at the speed limit in lane 3, not the overtaking lane as there is no such thing


Er, in the UK at least, there are two overtaking lanes.



Highway code said:


> _*264 *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..._


Lane hoggers prevent traffic from flowing because people are only legally allowed to overtake on the right, with one exception.


Highway code 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._


Undertaking is illegal, but then so is sitting in the outside lane. Two wrongs don't make a right, but the lane hogger has no high-ground to get offended when they are undertaken.

I don't undertake, but if I'm moving at 70mph (as I would never exceed the limit, officer) in the inside lane and there is somebody pootling along in the outside lane, I'm not going to make any effort to move out to the outside lane and wait for them to pull in. I have no problem cruising past them.

Actively manoeuvring past on an inside lane is a little dangerous IMHO, but I can understand why people do it in this circumstance.



AudiDoDatDen said:


> My licence is clean and covers LGV1, PCV, ADR Hazchem, bike and numerous other licences


Well good for you! How is the world looking from that lofty position? Don't throw your list of bits of paper on a forum, nobody cares, especially in a flame room, and you just land up looking like a nob.


----------



## Rustytt (Mar 24, 2009)

I'm reading this as a tacit admission that you ignore your daily instructions yet claim to have held down the job for ten years. It's one or the other any reasonable person would assume, but if it's both, well, let's just say I don't hold out much hope for the company.

You see the thing is you're trying hard to have it both ways & life's not like that. I've known many, many drivers with an inflated sense of their own worth - for example, _I drive a £250,000 truck_. So what? that's what it costs, how exactly does that make you, the driver special?

Then you say: _Don't kid yourself that your drivers take any notice of you once they've left the depot :roll:_ and then: _I've had my job for ten years_. So what is it? ten years of ignoring your orders? ten years of doing what you're told, but chucking a dig in at me because I dared to disagree with you & revealed that I'm a transport manager?

I agree though, arrogant people tend to lose out in life, but there's no limit on where you find them, from the boardroom to the steering wheel attendants, they're everywhere. :wink:


----------



## JNmercury00 (May 22, 2007)

Rustytt said:


> You missed the misspelling of inattentive if that's what you need to show your superiority. :roll:
> 
> You present an inherently unsafe scenario and ask me to approve of it? You must be kidding. Congratulations on all your licences. Whilst you were sweating behind the wheel of your HGV, I was taking a degree in transport management & ended up running operations for TDG at several sites, telling drivers what to do all day - over to you!


Fucking hell mate! No one likes a bragger!


----------



## alun (Aug 2, 2010)

am i too late to slag off lane hogs? or are we so far off topic now?


----------



## Charlie (Dec 15, 2006)

Another thread fucked up by people getting uppity and defensive :-(

Charlie


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

In my defence it was not a wholly unsafe manoeuvre. I undertook with the inside lane and hard shoulder to spare incase the driver in the outside lane woke up. However, I don't think they would have ever woken up. I did wait a fair while before I flashed them. By flashing them, I probably hurt their pride and turned them into a stubborn so and so. Getting a bit psycho-babbly now...

Secondly if they were that busy being distracted by whatever was in their car, then I didn't want to be the car behind them or to the side of them when they drove into the central reservation.

Plus, after I undertook, I did leave a trail of cars behind the dozing driver, who still stayed in the outside lane so he could flash me until the cows came home. They were a minor irritation sitting in the outside lane, but I was really angry to find that they were p*ssed off with me!!?!!

Anyway - if he wasn't paying attention what was wrong with doing that in the inside or middle lane?


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

AudiDoDatDen said:


> So not only speeding but undertaking too. No wonder there are so many crashes. Suppose this 'dozing' driver didn't react quickly enough and slammed into your rear. Who would be at fault I wonder :roll: :roll:


He didn't have to react - he could barely catch me up.


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

AudiDoDatDen said:


> So a car travelling at the speed limit in lane 3, not the overtaking lane as there is no such thing, is responsible for not only, I suspect, tailgating but a dangerous undertake probably in excess of 90mph and then has to cut back into lane 3 to avoid hitting a car I lane 2 is ok then. As for forcing the op to drive like this well they must have been pointing a gun at to cause dangerous driving.
> The car behind would not be responsible for an incident if I were a witness to such appalling driving.


Who said anything about tailgating? I don't spend my commutes undertaking for fun! Last resort and only once have I had to undertake some-one sat in the outside lane...

I didn't almost hit the car in lane 2. Your imagination is running wild Sir. I'm a girl in a TT on the M3 - not Keanu Reeves in Speed...

As for pointing a gun to my head to undertake, well we all know that life is not that cut and dry. A very simplistic view if you think that I was the only person to have undertaken them, judging by the tail of traffic stuck behind him, and the lack of traffic ahead of him.


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

Girl Smiffy said:


> AudiDoDatDen said:
> 
> 
> > So not only speeding but undertaking too. No wonder there are so many crashes. Suppose this 'dozing' driver didn't react quickly enough and slammed into your rear. Who would be at fault I wonder :roll: :roll:
> ...


i blame smiffy.........she started the thread lol............you can hide but you cant undertake lol


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

gazzer1964 said:


> i blame smiffy.........she started the thread lol............you can hide but you cant undertake lol


  do my best - but have opened up a proper can of worms :?


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

Girl Smiffy said:


> gazzer1964 said:
> 
> 
> > i blame smiffy.........she started the thread lol............you can hide but you cant undertake lol
> ...


lmao.........wd on this thread for starting a full on regime changing topic hun, this lot will be driving TT's at 70mph to downing street by thurs morn he he


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

70 down Whitehall will certainly make them sit and up stare. Wondering if the services of human rights lawyers can be called upon to help ;-)


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

Girl Smiffy said:


> 70 down Whitehall will certainly make them sit and up stare. Wondering if the services of human rights lawyers can be called upon to help ;-)


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dont mention human rights or the eu word will arise!!!!! ok slowly back off and will meet you in the forum coffe shop in 20 mins to discuss how to dissolve the tension of the natives before they revolt and attack the ladies section lol


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

gazzer1964 said:


> Girl Smiffy said:
> 
> 
> > 70 down Whitehall will certainly make them sit and up stare. Wondering if the services of human rights lawyers can be called upon to help ;-)
> ...


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## SalsredTT (Jan 8, 2011)

can we all burn our bra's too??

Or better yet - all fit car bra's ala Charlie! That would make Whitehall interesting!!


----------



## Girl Smiffy (Feb 19, 2010)

SalsredTT said:


> can we all burn our bra's too??
> 
> Or better yet - all fit car bra's ala Charlie! That would make Whitehall interesting!!


:lol: - all this laughing, I'm going to sleep well tonight


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

SalsredTT said:


> can we all burn our bra's too??
> 
> Or better yet - all fit car bra's ala Charlie! That would make Whitehall interesting!!


sal u burn ure bra i want videosssssssss lol.........cough cough being cool dude now.


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

Girl Smiffy said:


> SalsredTT said:
> 
> 
> > can we all burn our bra's too??
> ...


thats why guys are so insecure and turning gay lol............women laughing in bed..............of course never happened to me lol


----------



## SalsredTT (Jan 8, 2011)

Ain't got one on hun - precious little else either!!

God bless central heating hey!


----------



## Gazzer (Jun 12, 2010)

SalsredTT said:


> Ain't got one on hun - precious little else either!!
> 
> God bless central heating hey!


as mohamed said............more than a mouthfull is a waste!!! 8) 8) do like a mouthfull


----------

