Yep, I went over the speed limit to get past a car in my lesson, and the instructor said that was fine as long as as son as it was safe to slow down afterwards get beck to the speed limit as quickly as possible :) (And I over took alot on my lessons, he used to say he overtook more with me than with any of the other students put together !!!! LMAO)
Lea :)

so, if a police car was traveling at 58mph in a 60, how many of you would have the courage to overtake, going over the limit, then pull back in and slow to 59mph? :)

I do it on motorways!!!!!
Often police cars travel along at 65mph, so I go past just over 70-75, never been pulled yet LOL
I am sure they go slower than the national speed limit as they know, if they went dead on 70, then the traffic would back up behind them and cause such a problem!!!! LOL
Not sure I would pss one doing 58 on an A road though, as I can quite happily sit behind someone doing that speed.
Its meant more as passing someone going 50, getting past safely, I think I went up to 65, but as I slowed down just after I got in that was safe :) And I would pass a cop car going 50-55on an A road!!!!
Lea :)

At 58 mph in a 60 area then it's at the limit allowing for speedo discrepencies, and not dawdling. If it was going at 45-50 mph in a 60 area, it'd be different.

Here are the rules:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070314

>Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.

Now think this is the bit we needed!!! So if you are driving 50 in a 60 on a 'good, safe' road and there is alot of traffic behind you then you ARE comitting an offence!!!!!!!
Lea :)

There is a place in Europe but can't remember where (might be germany or Holland) where vehicles have to pull over if there is a queue of cars behind them and they are the obstruction.  This is probably most relevant to tractors, lorries and sunday drivers. 

>There is a place in Europe but can't remember where (might be germany or Holland) where vehicles have to pull over if there is a queue of cars behind them and they are the obstruction.

Ermm .... it's Britain! ;-) From the Highway Code:
169
Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.

> Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.

Jeangenie, that is an extremely subjective phrase you have lifted from the highway code.  My original post referred to a place where you have to pull over and it is enforced if you do not.  In the highway code, all parties will have an opinion of what 'if necessary' means.

Is it when 1 car is behind, 10 cars, 20 cars...   The country I was referring to, I believe has stated an actual number and I think it is something like 7 so if 7 cars are behind you, you are legally required to let them pass before you trundle on letting another 7 build up.

FWIW, I have no recollection of any prosecutions taking place of lorry drivers or tractors on country roads being prosecuted for going slowly - perhaps you have?

> In the highway code, all parties will have an opinion of what 'if necessary' means.

In this instance I'd say it's pretty clear that it means "if there is traffic stuck behind you".

I have seen a police car pull over a dawdling driver at the head of a long queue (siren & blue flashies to get to the front!) to force them to allow the held-up traffic to pass, but I've no idea if they were prosecuted or not.

Tractors etc are usually going as fast as they can, and are in my experience invariably very aware of what's happening behind them and frequently pull over or indicate to following drivers when it's safe to pass.

Slightly changing thread here, but it becomes apparent that we are not as au fait with the highway code as we probably should be :-)  Some refreshers needed me thinks :-)

I was always told when working on a farm that if there are mre than 10 cars behind you when in a tractor/combine etc you have to pull over and let them pass. Obviously this is not practicle on a very busy A road, but you would move over every few miles to let the traffic past before starting again!!!

Re- Highway code. Some people have NEVER read the high way code as it wasnt even out when some people started to drive. 2 of our customers havnt even taken a test, and YES a new highway code should be sent out to you EVERY time it is reviewed and there should be a way of proving you have read it!!!!
Re - Speed limits, I was thinking of this on the way back tonight aong the A15. WHEN were the speed limits put in place???
As when they were there were NO ABS, NO Power Steering, No antilock breaks and Possibly no Seat belt rule!!!!!
So cars have got safer and more easy to drive, so should the speed limits on certain roads be changed??? ( And nope I am NOT talking residential and school areas!!!!)
Lea :)

Found this.......

The first speed limit was the 10mph (16.1km/h) limit introduced by the Locomotive Act of 1861 (or "Red Flag Act") in the United Kingdom (automobiles were in those days termed "light locomotives"). In 1865, the revised Locomotive Act reduced the speed limit to 4 mph (6 km/h) in the country and 2 mph (3 km/h) in towns. The 1865 Act required a man with a red flag or lantern to walk 60 yards (50 m) ahead of each vehicle, enforce a walking pace, and warn horse riders and horse drawn traffic of the approach of a self-propelled machine. The replacement of the "Red Flag Act" by the Locomotive Act of 1896, and the increase of the speed limit to 14 mph (23 km/h) has been commemorated each year since 1927 by the London to Brighton Veteran Car Run.

of course, regarding speed, there is the other side of the coin, fuel economy. Why travel at full speed everywhere using more fuel than is necessary, especially with todays prices? What does annoy me is the driver who seems unable to work out how to overtake correctly, and sits on your bumper, pushing, and worse flashing their lights, or sits in a position right behind a HGV where the driver cannot see them, then suddenly pulls out and cuts back in, causing the driver to lose their stopping distance and having to break, or those total idiots who 'undertake' when you are at the speed limit yet they want to go faster. Also overtaking on an island, being in the outside lane but cutting across simply to get ahead. Impatient drivers who are annoyed because the car ahead is simply not going fast enough for them, yet fail to have the ability to perform a safe overtake, or even drive safely. far better to be 10 mins late in this world than 5 mins early in the next. Consideration for all road users by all road users is whats needed, not just speed.

The only time the national speed limit was 60 was during the 70's and it was only for a short period of time during the petrol shortage.

Coming very late to the discussion but I distinctly remember that there was a 60 limit for a long time. The speed limits were 50 on an A road, 60 on a dual carriageway and 70 on a motorway unless otherwise sign posted. I hadn't realised these had changed until my own children learnt to drive and was testing them on their highway code knowledge.

I think people are also trying to conserve fuel more now and so go at a speed that gives them optimum fuel consumption even if this is at a speed 10 miles below the national speed limit.

You can fail a motorbike test for driving well under the speed limit - you are considered to not be making progress and it counts as a fault.

Apologise for raking up an old thread, but I found out the answer to one of the things that came up.
Police cars not doing the speed limit on motor ways :) :)
Right, If they did the speed limit then every car would be behind them.
And when they are travelling along the motor ways/ duel carriage way they need to keep an eye out for anything wrong ie people on mobile phones/ people looking shifty due to drugs/drink etc anything that catches their eye.
If they stay at the speed limit then they wont be able to spot the people doing wrong ;)
This is from a copper of 30+ years LOL
At least I now know why they do it now :) :) :)
Lea :)

if they go through a speed camera and get caught doing over the limit (providing it was not a blue lighter) then they will get fined for it and risk points on their licence the same as any civilian

>or those total idiots who 'undertake' when you are at the speed limit yet they want to go faster.<

On what particular road are we talking about here? If you mean Motorways and you are sitting in the middle lane, which you must be, for other Motorists to undertake  - 'doing the speed limit' when there is no traffic on the inside lane, then maybe, although illegal, other drivers are making a point about your/the drivers/ lane discipline. The Police call people that 'hog' the middle lane for no good reason, the MLO's club.

Again, if you on a 2/3 lane dual carriageway and doing the speed limit in lane number 2 when there is nothing on the inside lane, this is not adhering to the highway code. It quite clearly states that on a Motorway, dual carriageway where applicable, lanes number 2 and 3 are for overtaking purposes only and when you are at the speed limit, when safe, you should pull in to lane 1.

I am currently in the process of taking my advanced driving test and am being taught by an ex Traffic Police Officer and it is quite enlightening listening to his tales of 'traffic madness'. ;)

>Why travel at full speed everywhere using more fuel than is necessary,<

I agree, I personally, when on a road where the limit is 60mph generally try do 50 and it's amazing how my fuel economy shoots up. In the last few weeks my fuel useage has gone up to 33.5 just by driving smoothly and not unnecessarily braking. And that is in my Mercedes auto M class. The official figures for it are 36.2 long distance and 29.4 for local runs - I have been doing mainly local runs. Considering it is only 6 months old and is a 3.0 diesel and hasn't run in properly yet I am pretty optimistic that with my current driving style I will improve.

>Consideration for all road users by all road users is whats needed, not just speed.<

I couldn't agree more :)

>if they go through a speed camera and get caught doing over the limit (providing it was not a blue lighter) then they will get fined for it and risk points on their licence the same as any civilian<

Are you really sure about that? Or is that your belief?

> It only gives warnings of cameras on your side of the road&nbsp; (ie ones that you can get prosecuted by) unlike many others that will annoyingly warn you of cameras regardless of which side they are on and whether they can be used in evidence against you.&nbsp;

So much for the claim that these gadgets are for safety, merely reminding you of the speed limits.  I have yet to drive on a road where the speed limit applied in only one direction so why would you be annoyed to be reminded that you are exceeding the limit when the camera is on the other side? 

>> if they go through a speed camera and get caught doing over the limit (providing it was not a blue lighter) then they will get fined for it and risk points on their licence the same as any civilian<
> Are you really sure about that? Or is that your belief?

I don't really know but you would jolly well hope so wouldn't you?  What excuse would there be for the police to be exempt? 

So much for the claim that these gadgets are for safety, merely reminding you of the speed limits.  I have yet to drive on a road where the speed limit applied in only one direction so why would you be annoyed to be reminded that you are exceeding the limit when the camera is on the other side? 

Because I would  already have passed through the zone known to cause accidents (by virtue of the camera location) and being notified of such would be an unnecessary distraction to me driving away from the zone and in the opposite direction.

> Because I would&nbsp; already have passed through the zone known to cause accidents (by virtue of the camera location)

No you wouldn't.  If this gadget was telling you you were approaching a camera you would be in the midst of a speed limit area the same as if you were approaching it from its detectable direction.  Nor are all cameras placed right on the edges of a zone.  If these gadgets are all about reminding you of speed restrictions I see no reason at all for excluding cameras that won't record your speed.
Also if people find the warning an unnecessary distraction I think you need to question their safety in having them in a car at all.

>If this gadget was telling you you were approaching a camera you would be in the midst of a speed limit area the same as if you were approaching it from its detectable direction.

Everywhere is in a speed limit area ... ;-) ... and it's been proven that the more signs there are, the more drivers are distracted, hence the campaign the reduce the numbers of signs on our roads.

> Everywhere is in a speed limit area ...

Of course :-)  I should have said in the midst of an area where you are exceeding the speed limit.

   >or those total idiots who 'undertake' when you are at the speed limit yet they want to go faster.<

On what particular road are we talking about here? If you mean Motorways and you are sitting in the middle lane, which you must be, for other Motorists to undertake  - 'doing the speed limit' when there is no traffic on the inside lane, then maybe, although illegal, other drivers are making a point about your/the drivers/ lane discipline. The Police call people that 'hog' the middle lane for no good reason, the MLO's club.

I mean when you are overtaking on a motorway or duel carriageway regardless of lanes, in middle or outside lane passing traffic, at the speed limit, and the vehicle behind cuts into the lane below you, and undertakes, pulling out again narrowly avoiding the other vehicles in the lane on your offside. You ask your ex traffic cop advanced driver what I mean ;)

No you wouldn't.  If this gadget was telling you you were approaching a camera you would be in the midst of a speed limit area

I'd have to disagree with that.

Cameras are there not to catch you speeding but to act as a deterrent to speeding in dangerous areas that's why the are painted in bright colours and their locations are published. To achieve this cameras would have to be located before any dangerous areas. This would seem to be borne out by the locations they are seen in, often placed just before dangerous junctions or crossings.

Central Scotland Police say:
"Because our aim is to improve safety, not to catch you speeding, our cameras are highly visible and we tell you the locations where they are operating. The sites cover stretches of road where people have been killed or injured and where there is a history of excess speed."

Gatso cameras (by far and away the most common type of camera around here) can only be used to take photographs from behind a vehicle and so a camera facing you on the other side of the road would be completely ineffective as a deterrent and highly unlikely to improve safety.

I stand by my claim that being warned about cameras on the other side of the road serves no useful purpose to a driver and is an unnecessary distraction. :)

> To achieve this cameras would have to be located before any dangerous areas. This would seem to be borne out by the locations they are seen in, often placed just before dangerous junctions or crossings.
>

Yes, but not necessarily at the beginning or end of a reduced speed restriction.  In my area I can think of several permanent cameras that are well within a whole zone of 30 miles an hour, presumably where drivers are more inclined to let their speed increase because it looks like a nice straight stretch for instance, but if you are relying on these gadgets to tell you if you are exceeding that speed restriction rather than reading the signs as some sort of aid to responsible driving you would equally want to know if you were exceeding it whenever a signal was available to remind you, not just when it represented a risk to prosecution.
I'm not even happy about these gadgets being used as an aid to responsible driving as it is clearly unsafe to rely on them as such because the cameras are not everywhere to provide a signal to remind you.  Personally if I had one and the alarm went off I would take that as a signal to consider how I might improve my concentration and road awareness such as taking an advanced driving course.  It can lower your insurance premiums too something I doubt these gadgets will ever do.

Yes it is definately true. Unless police/ambulance/firefighters can prove that they were en route to an emergency call then yes they get treated the same as everyone else. When patrolling in a police vehicle they shopuld be sticking to the speed limit until a blue light call comes up. I know this from studying the police force in my college course & knowing 2 police officers who have both been caught.