Although it’s a year old, why did it take so long after the law came in? It’s the easiest one to catch people for, I see it hundreds of times a day. They were right on the mobile phone one, you’d have thought they would be milking that cash cow too. But what the ■■■■ is the victim surcharge all about? Seeing as hgv’s can’t undertake, we’re the victims. Where do I put my claim in 
OVLOV JAY:
Although it’s a year old.
That is probably the first and last of such cases, you very rarely see police patrolling roads, and you always see people lane hogging.
This video still makes me laugh from over 3 years ago.
They do give out the fixed penalty from time to time, but this is the first time one has been taken to court for it. He probably didn’t pass the attitude test at the roadside.
OVLOV JAY:
Seeing as hgv’s can’t undertake
It’s still perfectly legal for you to approach a car from behind that’s in lane 2, continue past them using lane 1 and continue on your way.
m1cks:
OVLOV JAY:
Seeing as hgv’s can’t undertakeIt’s still perfectly legal for you to approach a car from behind that’s in lane 2, continue past them using lane 1 and continue on your way.
Yes you’re right, but the article said it was congested at the time, which suggests he was poodling along boxing traffic in. So you’d probably end up pulling out in front of him, making it an illegal manoeuvre. At least he got nicked. Like Clarkson said, if there’s enough room for me to undertake, there’s enough room for him to move over
That article is a year old and slightly misleading anyway. He wasn’t fines £1000, he received a fixed penalty notice of £60 which he ignored. It went to court and he failed to appear at court or give good reason why he shouldn’t so the court kept adding fines and costs.
Bloke should have challenged the FPL if he had a beef, ignoring it doesn’t make it go away.
For my part I’ve no sympathy.
m1cks:
OVLOV JAY:
Seeing as hgv’s can’t undertakeIt’s still perfectly legal for you to approach a car from behind that’s in lane 2, continue past them using lane 1 and continue on your way.
Nearly got stung by that last night. Two jokers doing 50 in the middle lane of the M6. I’m doing 53 in lane one and just about to pass them on the left when some clown in a reefer (the ones with a big polar bear on the side) comes roaring up behind them riding two inches off their bumper, flashing lights and sounding his horn. MLW decides lane one is the place to be! Lucky for me my spider sense tingled and I’d eased off, giving him somewhere to go!
£1000 fine is ridiculous.
Should be two.
Two quids a bit lenient EB
Times are hard Brother. Been limping since Xmas.
Back on full time as of Monday mate. Hell, I might even stop wearing my hi viz in the cab to celebrate.
This sends out a strong message that suggests the police are clamping down on it? 1 driver in all that time isn’t really much of a clampdown in my book 
What constitutes lane hogging ? is their a definition under law
For instance, travelling at a true 70mph on a dual whilst overtaking lorries travelling a 50mph in the inside lane. What is the minimum gap between the lorries that you would be expected to pull into to allow following traffic to speed up?
Bluey Circles:
What constitutes lane hogging ? is their a definition under lawFor instance, travelling at a true 70mph on a dual whilst overtaking lorries travelling a 50mph in the inside lane. What is the minimum gap between the lorries that you would be expected to pull into to allow following traffic to speed up?
I’ve been wondering what sort of speed he was doing, but there’s no excuse for not attending Court when you know they ain’t gunna give up.
peterm:
I’ve been wondering what sort of speed he was doing, but there’s no excuse for not attending Court when you know they ain’t gunna give up.
another article here gives the drivers point of view.
mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fi … le-5931458
As for the massive fine … a mates son had something similar, police stopped him and asked him to turn his fog lights off, he refused and asked what the law said, copper explained the minimum visible distance and as it was a sunny blue sky day could he please turn them off - the lad told him to get his F’n tape measure out, so the copper give him a £60 FPN, he refused to pay so it went to court, magistrate fined him £600, which he refused to pay. So the courts or bailiffs set up something so the money was taken directly out of his wages, In the end it cost him about £1200. And long before the court case he rolled his Corsa in a field and was going in and out of work on a push bike - LOL
If only he had of had the wit to say to the officer, sorry about that, didn’t realise they were on.
Bluey Circles:
peterm:
I’ve been wondering what sort of speed he was doing, but there’s no excuse for not attending Court when you know they ain’t gunna give up.another article here gives the drivers point of view.
mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fi … le-5931458As for the massive fine … a mates son had something similar, police stopped him and asked him to turn his fog lights off, he refused and asked what the law said, copper explained the minimum visible distance and as it was a sunny blue sky day could he please turn them off - the lad told him to get his F’n tape measure out, so the copper give him a £60 FPN, he refused to pay so it went to court, magistrate fined him £600, which he refused to pay. So the courts or bailiffs set up something so the money was taken directly out of his wages, In the end it cost him about £1200. And long before the court case he rolled his Corsa in a field and was going in and out of work on a push bike - LOL
If only he had of had the wit to say to the officer, sorry about that, didn’t realise they were on.
Many years ago when I first got my car I was stopped by a copper. Being a smart mouthed yoof I tried to argue my case. I still remember the coppers words like it was yesterday; “son, there are times you argue and times you don’t. This is one of them times you don’t!”
His point of view was on here at the time and someone had Googled the weather and wind speed and it wasn’t windy at all that day.
Still no real explanation why he failed to attend court. Having to go to work doesn’t really cut it.
Having read it from his side, I’ve got less sympathy now than I had before. He’s obviously got on peoples ■■■■ and then claimed windy conditions when there were none, not turned up at Court because he had to work. A load of BS there mate.
May be he was confused as the stretch of road he was on is known as “Windy Hill” and having ladders on your roof does always make it sound windy.
But if it was 25 Aug14 then it didn’t appear to be a windy day from this nearby weather station, in fact looking at the records it looked a relatively calm day.
wunderground.com/personal-w … 825/mdaily
So he says in the Mirror article that there were plenty of other vans and HGV’s in the inside lane but then goes on to say he had ladders on the roof and used the middle lane for safety. By virtue of all the other similar or larger vehicles already using lane 1 then you would also seem it safe for him to use lane 1 as well. His story is absolute bull.