# Penalty Points, should i appeal?



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

Hi all. Today i was driving home from Cork to Limerick when i was pulled over by a detectives car with lights flashing behind me, the decective came to my window and asked if i was in a rush home, i said i wasn't, and he said i had overtaken on a continous white line (which i would never do). I was amazed and said no i didn't, that i had over taken a slow moving lorry (which sped up as we were side by side) on broken white lines but by the time i'd overtaken, and was safe to pull back into the left lane i was now on a continous white line. What could i do but coutinue to finnish overtaking and then pull in. After awhile the detective aggreed i hadn't overtaken on a continous line but now he said "as soon as i saw the continous line i should have braked, allowed lorry to pass me out again, then waited in the wrong lane untill i had a chance to pull into the left lane again. Then he said i'd did it TWICE. I argued that i was allowed to overtake on a broken white line when it was safe and i didn't know that 100-200 meters up the road the lines changed to a continous line, he said i should pay more attention. Should i appeal these penalty points?

P.S Sorry about the long post and thanks in advance for any help


----------



## papervalue (8 Jun 2009)

I would appeal it, but be aware if it went to court, can they not increase the points.? What you did was a split second decision. I would find the truck driver more at fault for speeding up.

Based on what i saw on traffic blue programme on television last night a north reg driver got a fine and no penalty points due to be from the north- to me the whole integity of the system can not be respected by all till these people are brought into the system.


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> Hi all. Today i was driving home from Cork to Limerick when i was pulled over by a detectives car with lights flashing behind me, the decective came to my window and asked if i was in a rush home, i said i wasn't, and he said i had overtaken on a continous white line (which i would never do). I was amazed and said no i didn't, that i had over taken a slow moving lorry (which sped up as we were side by side) on broken white lines but by the time i'd overtaken, and was safe to pull back into the left lane i was now on a continous white line. What could i do but coutinue to finnish overtaking and then pull in. After awhile the detective aggreed i hadn't overtaken on a continous line but now he said "as soon as i saw the continous line i should have braked, allowed lorry to pass me out again, then waited in the wrong lane untill i had a chance to pull into the left lane again. Then he said i'd did it TWICE. I argued that i was allowed to overtake on a broken white line when it was safe and i didn't know that 100-200 meters up the road the lines changed to a continous line, he said i should pay more attention. Should i appeal these penalty points?
> 
> P.S Sorry about the long post and thanks in advance for any help


 
So you finished overtaking on a continous white line; so you did actually overtake at least at some point in an way that was not legal.  Secondly part of being a safe driver is to anticipate danger ahead; to read the signs so to speak..  If there was continous white lines two hundred meters ahead then it is likely that if you did not see it you should have seen a bend ahead and anticipated.  Personally I think its harsh enough on you but strictly speaking I dont think your going to get any where going to court except more PPs.  Another obvious fact is that this is all from your point of view.


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

Thats the problem with appealing, there's the risk of getting more penalty points plus the cop quickley changed his reason for stopping me when i insisted i'd overtaken on a broken white line which really p!$$es me off ,and your right about the truck driver he could have caused an accident and to make matters worse he looked out his side window and saw me overtaking and kept speeding up!


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

television said:


> So you finished overtaking on a continous white line; so you did actually overtake at least at some point in an way that was not legal.  Secondly part of being a safe driver is to anticipate danger ahead; to read the signs so to speak..  If there was continous white lines two hundred meters ahead then it is likely that if you did not see it you should have seen a bend ahead and anticipated.  Personally I think its harsh enough on you but strictly speaking I dont think your going to get any where going to court except more PPs.  Another obvious fact is that this is all from your point of view.



I would have overtaken and been safely back but this guy did speed up, i know because i was behind him long enough doing 70kmp/h and we were both side by side doing 90kmp/h when he was looking at me


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> Thats the problem with appealing, there's the risk of getting more penalty points plus the cop quickley changed his reason for stopping me when i insisted i'd overtaken on a broken white line which really p!$$es me off ,and your right about the truck driver he could have caused an accident and to make matters worse he looked out his side window and saw me overtaking and kept speeding up!


 
So the guard is wrong for seeing you driving recklessly and the truck driver is at fault for speeding up, you on the other hand are totally innocent.


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> I would have overtaken and been safely back but this guy did speed up, i know because i was behind him long enough doing 70kmp/h and we were both side by side doing 90kmp/h when he was looking at me


 
Was it an 80km speed limit by any chance?


----------



## mathepac (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> ... i had over taken a slow moving lorry (which sped up as we were side by side) on broken white lines but by the time i'd overtaken, and was safe to pull back into the left lane i was now on a continous white line. What could i do but coutinue to finnish overtaking and then pull in. After awhile the detective aggreed i hadn't overtaken on a continous line but now he said "as soon as i saw the continous line i should have braked, allowed lorry to pass me out again, then waited in the wrong lane untill i had a chance to pull into the left lane again ...


Poor anticipation, careless overtaking, getting involved in a race with the ill-mannered lorry driver - busted.

I agree with the Guard.


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

television said:


> So the guard is wrong for seeing you driving recklessly and the truck driver is at fault for speeding up, you on the other hand are totally innocent.



But i wasn't pulled for wreckless driving


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Was it an 80km speed limit by any chance?



no 100km/ph zone


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

mathepac said:


> Poor anticipation, careless overtaking, getting involved in a race with the ill-mannered lorry driver - busted.
> 
> I agree with the Guard.



How could i anticipate an ill-mannerad driver doing that


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> But i wasn't pulled for wreckless driving


 
The guard stopped you for driving wrecklessly how ever you want to play with the legal wording.  Fully aggree with meathpac summation.


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> How could i anticipate an ill-mannerad driver doing that


 
By observing your surroundings and observing the road ahead, by anticipating what may happen when you are coming up to an area where is probably going to be single white lines.


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> no 100km/ph zone


 
So the truck driver was going 70 MPH I wonder why that was?  Maybe he was aware if the conditions and was driving accordingly.  Maybe he was annoyed that a another driver was trying to overtake him in a place he deemed to be pretty stupid.  maybe he reacted (not condoning it) by putting on a little gas.


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

television said:


> By observing your surroundings and observing the road ahead, by anticipating what may happen when you are coming up to an area where is probably going to be single white lines.


 I observed my surroundings and road ahead, all was clear as far as the eye could see. as i said i couldn't this truck driver would do something so dangerous out of the blue, i did nothing wrong at this point and had no choice but to continue overtaking unless i was going to do something far more dangerous like slowing down and trying to get back across the broken lines before its too late between every other car stuck behind this nutter


----------



## blueblood (8 Jun 2009)

television said:


> So the truck driver was going 70 MPH I wonder why that was?  Maybe he was aware if the conditions and was driving accordingly.  Maybe he was annoyed that a another driver was trying to overtake him in a place he deemed to be pretty stupid.  maybe he reacted (not condoning it) by putting on a little gas.



Good road and condition, just because he's doing 70KPH dosn't mean we all should or he'll SHOW US  by putting on a little gas


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> I observed my surroundings and road ahead, all was clear as far as the eye could see. as i said i couldn't this truck driver would do something so dangerous out of the blue, i did nothing wrong at this point and had no choice but to continue overtaking unless i was going to do something far more dangerous like slowing down and trying to get back across the broken lines before its too late between every other car stuck behind this nutter


 
If you did not make a wreckless decision to overtake in a dangerous place the rest of the sanario does not happen.  Take some personal responsibility.  Dont mean to be harsh.


----------



## television (8 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> Good road and condition, just because he's doing 70KPH dosn't mean we all should or he'll SHOW US by putting on a little gas


 
Good road but with a single white line so potentially a dangerous road, where guards are patrolling.


----------



## Smashbox (9 Jun 2009)

> I observed my surroundings and road ahead, all was clear as far as the eye could see


 
You obviously didn't observe very much if there was a single white line ahead. You should have pulled back when you seen the white line coming ahead, I agree with the Guards here, you were in the wrong. You are not allowed to cross a continous white line - you did ie. you broke the law.


----------



## Kate10 (9 Jun 2009)

Television first of all its reckless not wreckless.  Secondly you are talking rubbish and it seems to me you are just trying to wind up the op.  

You judge the op for what seem to me to be fairly reasonable driving decisions, and praise the truck driver for what is clearly dangerous driving.  The truck driver increased his speed deliberately when the op tried to overtake legally, to try to force the op back behind his vehicle.  That is disgraceful driving IMO and could easily have caused an accident.  

Sounds to me like the garda made a bad call on this one.  I think it's wrong that people are not given an opportunity to defend themselves in court without running the risk of getting additional penalty points, but that's the way it is unfortunately.

I think you need to double check the specific rule of the road re overtaking and see if you were technically correct or incorrect.  If incorrect you should accept the points.  If it's a grey area or you were technically correct, then I would appeal.  Good luck.

Kate.


----------



## Latrade (9 Jun 2009)

Two wrongs don't make a right I'm afraid. The lorry driver who accelerated was guility of the first wrong, but prudent and safe driving in those circumstances would have stated that the person overtaking should have backed off and slowed down and waited for the next opportunity, just as the garda said.

It's harsh I suppose, but correct. I'm not really sure a judge on appeal could see it any differently.


----------



## LS400 (9 Jun 2009)

So the op checked what was necessary and over took as we all do, the lorry driver acts the maggot, the space they left has been taken, you make a judgement call.
The  guard did not like being corrected and looked for another way to make his point..

One more thing, after a broken white, line you get a double broken white line for one or two hundred yards to make you aware of a continious white line ahead.


----------



## Sconhome (9 Jun 2009)

Can make your own mind up depending on the situation that applies in the rules of the road.
You are allowed to overtake on a broken single white line (if safe to do so), if the line becomes solid are you meant to stay on the wrong side of the road? 
If the truck was doing 90km he should have been stopped. Trucks are legally required to be restricted to 80km p/hr.
Why didn't you drop down a gear and pass him at 100 ? If road was clear for 100-200m you could have easily passed.
Personally I wouldn't bother appealing, can go against you easily and you would be worse off. Unless you have 10 points and a facing disqualification with the next 2


----------



## blueblood (9 Jun 2009)

Television you are talking rubbish, by your logic nobody should never overtake (the vehicle driving in front is always going to be unpredictable and never ever predictable), i just cant predict these things but if you can you must be able to see into the future which i guess you can't or you would have been able to answer my question on original post instead of talking nonsense, as i said driving conditions were perfect, i had a chance to overtake a slow moving lorry. What's wrong with that? if i wasn't dealing with an unpredictable lorry driver towing a 40ft cargo container then i probably could have pulled back but would this unpredictable lorry driver have allowed me to, maybe, but probably not so sorry i just took the safer option and didn't take any chance with this maniac and continued to overtake him. Ah hindsight . My point was that the cop changed his mind as to why i was being pulled over when i pointed out that i definatly didn't and wouldn't overtake on a continous white line,


----------



## blueblood (9 Jun 2009)

Personally I wouldn't bother appealing, can go against you easily and you would be worse off. Unless you have 10 points and a facing disqualification with the next 2 [/quote]

I'm due to start a new job in sept and i dont know what they'll think if i have pp's on my licence


----------



## Ancutza (9 Jun 2009)

100% behind you on this one blueblood.  You can't always predict what the 'line' will do a few hundred metres ahead of you. 

The guard should have used his discretion and given you a dressing down.  It's this kind of jobs-worth behaviour which erodes the publics respect for the Gardai. Thats my take on it anyway.  Your critics are probably pedestrians with no comprehension of what it means to drive a car. 

You screwed up and should have got a tongue lashing but being given points (especially when the Guard agreed that you started your manouver on a broken line) is out of order in this instance


----------



## blueblood (9 Jun 2009)

I admit the overtaking probably looked bad on my behalf from a distance to the cop.I think another big factor was how vigorously i defended myself untill he finally admitted i hadn't started my overtaking on a continous line, i was just so pi$$ed by what this lorry driver had done and that i was the one getting pulled over, then he said "you did that twice" as if to say i would have been better off if i'd just agreed the first time.


----------



## television (9 Jun 2009)

Kate10 said:


> Secondly you are talking rubbish and it seems to me you are just trying to wind up the op.


 
I am talking rubbish? Why? Constructive opening point!



Kate10 said:


> You judge the op for what seem to me to be fairly reasonable driving decisions.


 
Reasonable according to you maybe.



Kate10 said:


> and praise the truck driver for what is clearly dangerous driving.


 
Where did I praise the truck driver?



Kate10 said:


> I think you need to double check the specific rule of the road re overtaking and see if you were technically correct or incorrect. If incorrect you should accept the points. If it's a grey area or you were technically correct, then I would appeal. Good luck.


 
See thats the point really, the original poster and perhaps you too, should understand the rules of the road before you drive. Not try and retrospectivly look for validation or legality.


----------



## ashambles (9 Jun 2009)

A policeman will rarely be argued down even if he realizes he's made a mistake. 

He'll be hyped up to some extent on adrenalin, essentially confronting someone he's never met before, which can come across as aggression or just unreasonableness. 

The Garda who approaches will be the one who thought he saw an offense, usually he'll have another Garda or two back in the car so it looks bad to return and say "made a mistake there, chap made some good points". 

If pulled in look intimidated and apologetic. Difficult if you haven't a clue why he's pulled you, say due to a complete mistake, as it makes the self incriminatory answer to "do you know why I stopped you" difficult. Being relaxed because you're sure of your innocence unfortunately is red flag to a bull territory. 

There a chance if the Garda thinks he's frightened you that'll be victory enough for him to just issue a warning especially if the case isn't clear cut. 

In this case however I wouldn't bother appealing it'll drag out the worry and annoyance by 6+ months, and in the brief few words you're likely to get to explain yourself to the judge it'll be hard to get around the fact that at some point no matter how unavoidably a solid white line was crossed. 

If you're thinking of appealing and are unfamiliar with courts I'd recommend you drop in to the courthouse first and have a look at what you're likely to encounter. Let's just say it's a long way from Ally McBeal.


----------



## television (9 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> Television you are talking rubbish, by your logic nobody should never overtake (the vehicle driving in front is always going to be unpredictable and never ever predictable), i just cant predict these things but if you can you must be able to see into the future which i guess you can't or you would have been able to answer my question on original post instead of talking nonsense,


 
You should not appeal because you were in the wrong.  Take some personal responsibility and see it as a learning experience.

Yes drivers are unpredictable which means there is a responsibility to behave very carefully when driving.




blueblood said:


> as i said driving conditions were perfect, i had a chance to overtake a slow moving lorry. What's wrong with that?


 
By your own admission you finished overtaking through continous white lines.


----------



## television (9 Jun 2009)

ashambles said:


> A policeman will rarely be argued down even if he realizes he's made a mistake.
> 
> He'll be hyped up to some extent on adrenalin, essentially confronting someone he's never met before, which can come across as aggression or just unreasonableness.
> 
> ...


 
There is a lot of pop psychology here about guards behaviour. Very few guards are out thier trying to intimidate people or get a kick out of frightening people.



ashambles said:


> it'll be hard to get around the fact that at some point no matter how unavoidably a solid white line was crossed. .


 
And that is why the guy should not appeal.


----------



## whackin (9 Jun 2009)

Kate10 said:


> Television first of all its reckless not wreckless.  Secondly you are talking rubbish and it seems to me you are just trying to wind up the op.
> 
> You judge the op for what seem to me to be fairly reasonable driving decisions, and praise the truck driver for what is clearly dangerous driving.  The truck driver increased his speed deliberately when the op tried to overtake legally, to try to force the op back behind his vehicle.  That is disgraceful driving IMO and could easily have caused an accident.
> 
> ...



I tend to agree here, especially with the first part.


----------



## blueblood (9 Jun 2009)

television said:


> See thats the point really, the original poster and perhaps you too, should understand the rules of the road before you drive. Not try and retrospectivly look for validation or legality.



I understand the rules of the road just fine and i'm sure kate10 dose also but you are missing the point.
I was prevented completing a perfectaly legal maneuver by some idiot who broke the law by speeding up as i was overtaking him, it's not as black and white as you want to make it


----------



## whackin (9 Jun 2009)

I agree, it seems that the truck driver was the one who drove incorrectly. Speeding up when someone is overtaking (whether the latter is doing so correctly or not) is extremely dangerous.


----------



## television (9 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> I understand the rules of the road just fine and i'm sure kate10 dose also but you are missing the point.
> I was prevented completing a perfectaly legal maneuver by some idiot who broke the law by speeding up as i was overtaking him, it's not as black and white as you want to make it


 
Changed my mind actually, go to court, fight it out with the same zelous certainty as you are showing here. Get back to me when the judge give you 4 points.


----------



## television (9 Jun 2009)

whackin said:


> I agree, it seems that the truck driver was the one who drove incorrectly. Speeding up when someone is overtaking (whether the latter is doing so correctly or not) is extremely dangerous.


 
The truck driver was wrong to speed up.  The OP was wrong for what he did.  I find it hard to believe that the OP did not see any evidence of the potential for a continous white line ahead.


----------



## Willowchase (9 Jun 2009)

I must say  my sympathies are with OP in this situation.  There is no doubt that there are many drivers who seem to resent being overtaken and actually accelerate. It has happened to me many times.

If  OP had been following this vehicle for some time and it was not a situation where they had just left a restricted speed area i.e. 50 kph, or a sharp bend, where it could be reasonably assumed that the driver in front would accelerate, then OP was indeed caught between a rock and a hard place. Op said, he/she would have been safely  back on the correct side of road had the driver in front maintained his existing speed.

I can well see that there could be a problem in braking and pulling back. In the first place OP would probably be on the wrong side of the road for a longer period and secondly most Irish drivers do not believe in the 2 second rule meaning that it could be difficult to drop in behind the other vehicle while following driver (unmarked garda car in this instance unfortunately?) made up his/her mind as to whether to give way or not. Therefore, assuming the road ahead was seen to be clear enough, notwithstanding the continuous white lines the safest option could very well have been to complete the manoeuvre. 

Even in the above scenario the OP was technically in the wrong and possibly a reasonable guard might have been prepared to deal with the matter with a warning if the offender appeared trite enough. This may have been the problem, a refusal to accept the fact that he/she was driving illegally on the incorrect side of the road.

Unfortunately I know a certain percentage of guards like to use their power because they can.  I have also seen garda cars being driven and parked in ways which would earn lesser mortals penalty points if there were someone to enforce the law on them. BTW I'm not knocking the Gardai just stating facts. I know many gardai, even related to some, who are very decent people but in every walk of life you have the difficult type.

Anyway, having said that, I would advise OP to accept the situation rather than fight it as it would possibly end in additional penalty points. Without a witness to back your version of events it's your word against the guards and you were in the wrong even if through no fault of your own.


----------



## samanthajane (10 Jun 2009)

As much as i think the truck driver was acting like an idiot i think your best to just get the points and be done with it. 

I got pulled over for over taking on the inside...yes i know your not suppose to but when you have someone that's doing 70 in the over taking lane ( that would be the fast lane/outside lane as most would call it ) and you have somewhere to be and your still sticking to speed limit you to get tempted to over take on the inside and start shouting at them to pull over as you pass even though you know they cant hear you. 

Now i could be wrong in this as i've never know any one to get done for staying in the overtaking lane but i think you should get points for that as well. You do in England. Even when i'm driving in NI if someone over takes they pull in straight away afterwards even if it means have to over take again a few mins later. 

You were lucky there wasn't an accident cause who ever was in the worng you would of been to blame. My fella was driving, under the speed limit about 5 car spaces behind someone else, she went over a hill and he lost sight of her for a few seconds. When he saw her again she had slammed on her brakes ( on a continous white line ) so she could turn right to pull into a garden center. He went into her so that was that, and the only reason the guy behind us didn't hit him was he drove into a ditch. What was even more annoying was there was a roundabout a few mins up the road she could of turned around on.


----------



## blueblood (10 Jun 2009)

television said:


> The truck driver was wrong to speed up.  The OP was wrong for what he did.  I find it hard to believe that the OP did not see any evidence of the potential for a continous white line ahead.



Right television at least now you admit what the truck driver did was wrong. Why oh why do you find it hard to believe i did not see any evidenceof the potentiial for a continous white line ahead?, you dont even know me, It became evident when it was too late. With attitudes like yours no wonder people think twice before appealing you've opened my eyes so to speak!

P.s I also have a front seat passanger who witnessed all, but cop reckons i did it twice because i argued with him  ​


----------



## sam h (10 Jun 2009)

I also think you you should fight this.  The rules of the road state that when you are being overtaken:



> *What to do when somebody overtakes you*
> 
> 
> Continue at the same pace.
> ...




The guy in the truck should not have sped up & you moved back onto your side of the road as soon as it was safe.


----------



## television (10 Jun 2009)

sam h said:


> I also think you you should fight this. The rules of the road state that when you are being overtaken:
> 
> [/list]The guy in the truck should not have sped up & you moved back onto your side of the road as soon as it was safe.


 
Thats all very well but the issue is with the OP not the truck driver.


----------



## television (10 Jun 2009)

cerbera1 said:


> and just because it then turned into a continous white line a couple of hundred yards up doesn't make it illegal.


 
Yes it does if part of the overtaking manouver involved him cross continous white lines.


----------



## Smashbox (10 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Yes it does if part of the overtaking manouver involved him cross continous white lines.


 
Agree with television here, thats exactly what it means.

Obviously the police can't prove if the lorry sped up or not, thats just the OPs word. Its not a nice situation but the OP did cross a continous white line, which is not allowed.


----------



## Cayne (10 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Yes it does if part of the overtaking manouver involved him cross continous white lines.


 
Rediculous arguement. Technically he didnt cross over the white line when he initiated the over taking manouvre. Think of the amount of road that is covered when you are over taking a vehicle at 80 to 100 KM/h. 

From rules of road:

All traffic must keep to the left of the line (except in an emergency or for access).



Note for access - if driver has committed to manouvre then he must get access back onto left side.

Taking this a step further check out the over taking rules:



I dont see here where it says the user must not cross back over a continuous white line when completing the over taking, or should check ahead in case there is a continuous white line which could be 400 or 500 metres ahead. Its common sense. 

Anyways if the user does encounter a continuous white line doesnt he/she have to cross back over it either way whether he passes the car out or waits till the car he is attempting to pass passes him out.

I would contest it OP.


----------



## JoeB (10 Jun 2009)

Yes, people focusing on the continous white line and saying that it's black and white need to explain what should be done??? If you start a perfectly legal over taking manoveur on broken white lines and then it becomes a continous white line what can be done? The unbroken white line must be crossed again.. it seems immaterial to me whether the driver continues to overtake.. or slows down to re-enter behind the truck.

Some poster said that an early warning will be given of unbroken white lines... (a double broken white line) I personally don't know about that.. probably because there were no rules of the road available for about 8 years... when I was learning to drive, and for about 4 years after..

Contesting a case like this is a bit of a nightmare.. it's unlikely that the detective would turn up.. anyway the OP seems to have a reasonable point. However I have contested cases like this, and seen it go nowhere.. depends on the judge I think. At least the judge may be able to advise how you'd get back across the unbroken white line once you've been effectively tricked into crossing it.


----------



## JoeB (10 Jun 2009)

From Cayne's link above the thing about the double broken white lines indicating a unbroken white line ahead is accurate... and it mentions that such a double broken white line should not be crossed...

However how can one know whether the double broken line will become a unbroken line, because it may become a broken single white line?


----------



## television (10 Jun 2009)

Cayne said:


> Rediculous arguement. Technically he didnt cross over the white line when he initiated the over taking manouvre. Think of the amount of road that is covered when you are over taking a vehicle at 80 to 100 KM/h.
> 
> From rules of road:
> 
> ...


 
Not sure all that makes any sense!!!! Any of it!

And as for my argument being ridiculous; im afraid its actually the law. Again if you cross over a continous white line to overtake you have broken the law. Simple really.


----------



## television (10 Jun 2009)

JoeBallantin said:


> At least the judge may be able to advise how you'd get back across the unbroken white line once you've been effectively tricked into crossing it.


 
Its about taking personal resonsibility really.  When you are driving you have a duty to be careful, not to take unncessery risks and read the road conditions ahead. If you fail to read those conditions take unnecessary risks than it is likely you will get into the kind of situation the OP got into.  He needs to stop blaiming the truck driver, guards, etc and admit he was wrong and stop trying to get out of it.


----------



## television (10 Jun 2009)

JoeBallantin said:


> Yes, people focusing on the continous white line and saying that it's black and white need to explain what should be done???


 
that kind of logic could be used as a defence against all cases of someone who overtakes on a continous white line as long as if it begins on a broken white line!!


----------



## casiopea (11 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Its about taking personal resonsibility really.  When you are driving you have a duty to be careful, not to take unncessery risks and read the road conditions ahead. If you fail to read those conditions take unnecessary risks than it is likely you will get into the kind of situation the OP got into.  He needs to stop blaiming the truck driver, guards, etc and admit he was wrong and stop trying to get out of it.



But television, if ahead of you the line is broken when you overtake (as far as the eye can see) this surely is not an unnecessary risk and it is a correct reading of the conditions?  You can read conditions but not predict conditions - indeed predicting conditions and making decisions on that would be dangerous. If you are then in a position where you have to cross a continous line it seems unfair that you are breaking the law - is it just tough luck?  

It would seem to me, if that is true, to remain within the law you should only overtake in areas you know.  I had a driving experience where I overtook someone (something I very very rarely do - Im usually being overtaken) on a route that I drive everyday however road works had taken place and what was a broken white line the previous Friday became a continous white line.  Luckily it was 2 lane road so I just had to remain in the faster lane rather than overtake back into the slower lane.  However if it had been one way each way I would have had no choice but to break the law.

My point being you can read conditions correctly but still find yourself very easily in the OPs position. It does seem unfair.


----------



## Cayne (11 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Again if you cross over a continous white line to overtake you have broken the law. Simple really.


 
But he didnt cross the white line to over take! 

Anyways I think your winding people up here.  Quote the rules of the road where it says that you cant cross back over the continuous white line after completing an over taking manouvre.

I accept you cant cross over white line to initiate an over taking manouvre. But the OP didnt do this.

As a matter of interest how long are you driving?


----------



## blueblood (11 Jun 2009)

Smashbox said:


> Agree with television here, thats exactly what it means.
> 
> Obviously the police can't prove if the lorry sped up or not, thats just the OPs word. Its not a nice situation but the OP did cross a continous white line, which is not allowed.



  Smashbox some things are unavoidable like for example if your driving down the road with a continous white line, now on the other side of the line the road is empty  and suddenly a pedestrian falls or is pushed onto the road a few yards in front of you in your lane, now you can stay on your side of the road, just break and hope the pedestrian magically dissapears or you will hit him but all's well as long as you don't cross the white line because thats now allowed right . If you think people 100% shouldn't cross a continous you shouldn't be driving as this narrow mindedness is dangerous. Just making a point guys, safety first..




television said:


> Thats all very well but the issue is with the OP not the truck driver.



No television the truck driver *is* the issue, thats why this whole incident happened and why i posted in the first place ​


----------



## television (11 Jun 2009)

Cayne said:


> But he didnt cross the white line to over take!
> 
> Anyways I think your winding people up here. Quote the rules of the road where it says that you cant cross back over the continuous white line after completing an over taking manouvre.
> 
> ...


 
Just because it does not specifficaly say that is does not mean it is legal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Obviously the rules of the road cannot refer to all possible senarios as that would be completly impossible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you seriously telling me that it is okay to finish an overtaking manouver on a continous white line if it begins on a broken white line??? Can you see the complete chaos that kind of logic would cause in the courts.  Any insane driver could use it to as a defence to drive like a mad man.  Traffic rules are made to be clear to stop people trying to use any excuse to dodge the law and stop people acting like idiots. 



Cayne said:


> As a matter of interest how long are you driving?


 
WHat kind of a question is that?  I could tell you I have been driving 30 years and wht would that matter really.  Just to say I have been driving a a long time and i have 0 PPs on my licence.


----------



## television (11 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> No television the truck driver *is* the issue, thats why this whole incident happened and why i posted in the first place


 
Oh I see now. I thought the issue was you asking wheather or not to appeal. The issue happened because of the way you were ddriving. Again blaim the guards, the truck driver, your mammy etc, but you were still driving the car!!!


----------



## Smashbox (11 Jun 2009)

> If you think people 100% shouldn't cross a continous you shouldn't be driving as this narrow mindedness is dangerous


 
I didn't say that. You are not allowed to overtake on a continous white line, surely this white line was there for a reason ie. corner, hill crest, etc. Its there for a reason, its unsafe to be on the other side of the road at that time, and the OP WAS on the wrong side of the road at that time.


----------



## sam h (11 Jun 2009)

My reading of the rules of the road (I had a look yesterday & it doesn't give an exact answer
 - You should not start to over take on a continuous white line - there does not seem to be a reference to completing an overtaking manevour where a broken line become a continuous one
 - where there is a white line - you should not start to overtake & you should keep to the left of the line => the OP was endevouring to keep to the left of the white line by pulling back in.  The OP may have completed the manevour while the line was still broken if the the truck driver had not speed up.

There are many short stretches on broken white line that return to contineous and there is not way a car could complete within the broken line part.


----------



## Cayne (11 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Just because it does not specifficaly say that is does not mean it is legal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Obviously the rules of the road cannot refer to all possible senarios as that would be completly impossible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


 
Doesnt make it illegal either which is the bones of your arguement. If you were to over take some one and the line changes to continuous the onus on the driver is to quickly get back on the left side within the speed limit. No where does it say they must hold back - this would be a reckless thing to do in my opinion. 

Anyways enough said as I think we re all entrenched in our views on this one. But I do take your point.


----------



## blueblood (11 Jun 2009)

Smashbox said:


> Agree with television here, thats exactly what it means.
> 
> Obviously the police can't prove if the lorry sped up or not, thats just the OPs word. Its not a nice situation ------------*but the OP did cross a continous white line*, -------*which is not allowed*---------.





Smashbox said:


> I didn't say that.
> 
> Didn't you


----------



## blueblood (11 Jun 2009)

television said:


> Oh I see now. I thought the issue was you asking wheather or not to appeal. The issue happened because of the way you were ddriving. Again blaim the guards, the truck driver, your mammy etc, but you were still driving the car!!!



Television are you for real?You know that one of the reasons there's an appeal system is *because not everything in the real world is black and white, there's also a grey area*. Stop trying to wind people up as a number of people here think you might be doing. If your not doing this then seriously take a good look at yourself .​ 
B.T.W i'd be very interisted (more curious tho) to know *what would you  do *in this situation without upsetting anyone and without crossing the continous white line -(since i'm still waiting for a responce to this question from *Smashbox*)

 some things are unavoidable like for example if your driving down the road with a continous white line, now on the other side of the line the road is empty and suddenly a pedestrian falls or is pushed onto the road a few yards in front of you in your lane, now you can stay on your side of the road, just break and hope the pedestrian magically dissapears or you will hit him but all's well as long as you don't cross the white line because thats now allowed right . If you think people 100% shouldn't cross a continous you shouldn't be driving as this narrow mindedness is dangerous. Just making a point guys, safety first

There's loads more hypothetical questions where through no fault of your own or circumstances outside your control you might be forced into a split decision and have little choice but to brake the law to prevent a tragedy. If you cant think of any then poor poor you, tut tut tut


----------



## television (11 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> Television are you for real?You know that one of the reasons there's an appeal system is *because not everything in the real world is black and white, there's also a grey area*. Stop trying to wind people up as a number of people here think you might be doing. If your not doing this then seriously take a good look at yourself .​


 
i am not trying to wind you up far from it actually, if your driving had caused an accident you or someone else coudl have been hurt. It actually winds me up that you think your so innocent.​ 




blueblood said:


> B.T.W i'd be very interisted (more curious tho) to know *what would you do *in this situation without upsetting anyone and without crossing the continous white line -(since i'm still waiting for a responce to this question from *Smashbox*).


 
I would never and have never overtaken over continous white lines, I just dont do it. If I ever did like your situation I would except that I was driving take and accept personal responsibility



blueblood said:


> some things are unavoidable like for example if your driving down the road with a continous white line, now on the other side of the line the road is empty and suddenly a pedestrian falls or is pushed onto the road a few yards in front of you in your lane, now you can stay on your side of the road, just break and hope the pedestrian magically dissapears or you will hit him but all's well as long as you don't cross the white line because thats now allowed right . If you think people 100% shouldn't cross a continous you shouldn't be driving as this narrow mindedness is dangerous. Just making a point guys, safety first).


 
this is a very different situation. You would have no choice but to break the law to save a persons life, now if a guard had giiven you two points in that situation then he would be a muppet and Id say youd probably have a good defence to give to the judge on appeal! However in your suituation you were not faced with a huge ethical/moral delema, you just took it opon yourself to overtake a truck without due regard to the road conditions. The guards were behind you seen you breaking the law and pulled you up on it. End of story.


----------



## Smashbox (11 Jun 2009)

> B.T.W i'd be very interisted (more curious tho) to know *what would you do *in this situation without upsetting anyone and without crossing the continous white line -(since i'm still waiting for a responce to this question from *Smashbox*)


 
I answered you already. Your not allowed to cross a single white line whilst overtaking, as there is obviously something up ahead. As for crossing it because you have to move out or avoid an obsticle, you're just being childish with your examples.


----------



## blueblood (12 Jun 2009)

Ok *smashbox & television* i'll make it as simple as i can and i'l try this one more time-*

Q1-* What do you do if you are overtaking another vehicle on a* broken white line*, then the vehicle you are overtaking *won't allow you pull back into your lane?*
*A-............................................

**Q2- *Did the driver of the other vehicle follow the Rules of the Road *or* commit an offence by driving in such a manner?
*A-............................................
*
*Q3-* Would there have been any incident if other vehicle had not *driven in such a manner?*
*A-*.*...........................................
*


----------



## mathepac (12 Jun 2009)

@ blueblood, I believe this thread has run its course and you're now indulging in pointless "What if" scenarios more appropriate to The Depths (STB or LOS), neither of which you can post in yet unfortunately.

The consensus seems to be you were wrong and got a ticket.

Personally, I can't see any value in going to court to challenge the Guard's view of events, but that option is still open to you. Other than that you are faced with paying the fine and taking the points.


----------



## television (12 Jun 2009)

blueblood said:


> Ok *smashbox & television* i'll make it as simple as i can and i'l try this one more time-
> 
> *Q1-* What do you do if you are overtaking another vehicle on a* broken white line*, then the vehicle you are overtaking *won't allow you pull back into your lane?*
> *A-............................................*
> ...


 
While agreeing with Meathpac,  I am going to indulge the OP by answering.

1. I would slow down rapidly and find a place behind the driver ahead. 

2. Its your word that he did not follow the rules of the road.  

3. You caused the incident by driving over the line not the other driver.  

I know you think your hard done by and blaim the other driver, and in fairness if he did speed up he was acting like a prat, but thats not the point. You are responcible for your driving no one else. What ever you say about him speeding up you crossed the line not him.


----------



## Smashbox (12 Jun 2009)

Blueblood, everyone is not going to follow you just because you keep saying the same thing over and over. You're also not going to get a definitive answer. You were in the wrong and got caught. This thread has spiraled out of topic and is just useless chatter now.

Go seek legal advice if you think you can appeal it.


----------



## Smashbox (12 Jun 2009)

television said:


> While agreeing with Meathpac, I am going to indulge the OP by answering.
> 
> 1. I would slow down rapidly and find a place behind the driver ahead.
> 
> ...


 
I also agree with television and mathe. No one else seen the other driver speed up, only you. The gardai didnt see that, they saw you.

If there was an accident, it was because you were on the wrong side of the road. Who would know that the other driver sped up if you were (God forbid) killed? It would only be seen that you were overtaking a lorry, there was a single white line, and something else coming the other way.

A tragedy, but the lorry driver wouldnt come out and say 'Oh well it wasn't Bluebloods fault, I sped up'.


----------

