Fine for 'not moving over' squashed

Mike Hoxbig said:
No matter your speed, you should be on the left unless you are overtaking.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But mostly there are cars in the leftlane going the same or slower speeds thus it can take anything from 2 mins to an hour to have a safe gap to change lanes.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
You should be doing 130 on the left, as the law requires, unless you're overtaking. God, did some of you people buy your learner's license?
Click to expand...

I don't know hey... when I did my test they focused more on the part where you had to obey the speed limit and less on the part where you had to get out of the way of *********s who think they own the road.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Whether he was aware or not, he should have been on the left, unless he was overtaking, which he obviously wasn't.
Click to expand...

Mike Hoxbig said:
By his own admission that he saw the car, and would have given way to an emergency vehicle. i.e. he admitted to deliberately hogging the lane.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/move-over-or-you-ll-be-fined-1.1169666?pageNumber=1
Click to expand...

Mike Hoxbig said:
He admitting as much as hogging the lane for no other reason other than the police car not having it's blue lights on. Only then, he says, would he have moved over.
Click to expand...

From this link that was posted earlier he says:
I do know the keep left pass right rule but was not able to move and felt why should I move if I am being forced to do so.
Click to expand...
So perhaps he wasn't hogging after all.
 
daveza said:
Then at rush hour everyone in the right hand lane should be pulled over and fined ?
Click to expand...

It's part of the reason why there is a rush hour. The rule is there to ensure a smoother flow of traffic. Obviously it won't ensure that there is no traffic, but traffic is one of those things that happens where the rule cannot be enforced. We're talking about people on a free-flowing road who log the overtaking lane.
 
I'm guessing from the responses in this thread that no one bothered to read the link that OMB posted. Once more: http://www.insurancechat.co.za/2011...-motorists-for-not-moving-from-the-fast-lane/

That should explain:
1. Why you do have to move over regardless of your personal damn opinion
2. Why this case probably went the way it did - doesn't mean the motorist was in the right. The IOL article also clearly states that "the officer who issued the fine had abused his power".
 
daveza said:
To be pedantic, the Act does not make that distinction.
Click to expand...

It obviously can't be enforced in traffic though (which may be as a result of various factors). But it can be enforced in isolated instances such as an open road. The fact that it's in the Act means that it needs to be enforced where possible.
 
daveza said:
I would be very interested to see what happens if a cop vehicle was in the right-hand lane doing 120 and a private vehicle came up behind him and flashed his lights.....
Click to expand...

I've come across a few cops that were hogging and I dealt with them the same way as everyone else: I pass them on the left. Mind you, I wasn't really passing on the left, I was merely returning to the left because I was no longer overtaking anyone ;)
 
efitol said:
I've come across a few cops that were hogging and I dealt with them the same way as everyone else: I pass them on the left. Mind you, I wasn't really passing on the left, I was merely returning to the left because I was no longer overtaking anyone ;)
Click to expand...

Overtaking on the left is not illegal, it is only "not advised".


@Ava
“(5) Where the driver of a motor vehicle which is being driven in the right-hand traffic lane or in the traffic lane furthest to the right on a freeway (hereinafter referred to as the first vehicle) becomes aware that the driver of another motor vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the second vehicle) intends to overtake the first vehicle, the driver of the first vehicle shall steer that vehicle to a lane to the left of the one in which he or she is driving, without endangering himself or herself or other traffic or property on the freeway, and shall not accelerate the speed of his or her vehicle until the second vehicle has passed.

(6) For the purposes of subregulation (5) the driver of the second vehicle may make the driver of the first vehicle aware that he or she intends to overtake the first vehicle by giving the driver thereof a visible signal by means of flashing the headlights of his or her vehicle.”
Click to expand...

Now that par is open for some CRAZY subjectiveness. For an old lady it could be that she needs a 25 meter gap before it becomes "safe".

Also if the person is tailgating then you could make the case that you were scared to change lanes as you were scared that the car behind you would try and shoot past on the left hand side...

Also the persons point on "it could be a someone having a heart attack" is not valid if the person driving "car two" does not have the emergency indicators on.
 
Last edited:
Devill said:
Overtaking on the left is not illegal, it is only "not advised".


@Ava


Now that par is open for some CRAZY subjectiveness. For an old lady it could be that she needs a 25 meter gap before it becomes "safe".

Also if the person is tailgating then you could make the case that you were scared to change lanes as you were scared that the car behind you would try and shoot past on the left hand side...
Click to expand...

Yes I'm also of the opinion that it isn't illegal, but many here are not and so I spun it from a different angle :D
 
AvatarS said:
I'm guessing from the responses in this thread that no one bothered to read the link that OMB posted. Once more: http://www.insurancechat.co.za/2011...-motorists-for-not-moving-from-the-fast-lane/

That should explain:
1. Why you do have to move over regardless of your personal damn opinion
2. Why this case probably went the way it did - doesn't mean the motorist was in the right. The IOL article also clearly states that "the officer who issued the fine had abused his power".
Click to expand...


From the article:
Additionally any person who thinks that they have the right to act as a traffic cop towards other motorists is in fact engaging in a very dangerous practice. It is not the responsibility of motorists to police other motorists by obstructing them and it is always a better tactic to get out of the way of a speeding motorist, rather than try and slow them down. Many road rage incidents arise out of people assuming that they do indeed have the right to obstruct delinquent motorists and this should be avoided at all costs. You always have the right to report them to the RTMC traffic call centre on 0861 400 800 or to your local authority if you feel that they are driving dangerously.
Click to expand...

That works both ways BTW.If I am not moving over for whatever reason, don't presume that it is safe for me to do so.
You can tell me to move over but if the people in the middle lane are traveling 80km\h then it is not safe for me to move in to that lane.
 
Nerfherder said:
From the article:


That works both ways BTW.If I am not moving over for whatever reason, don't presume that it is safe for me to do so.
You can tell me to move over but if the people in the middle lane are traveling 80km\h then it is not safe for me to move in to that lane.
Click to expand...

EDIT: Also, the last time I was almost taken out, it was a cop car with light on and no siren. It came from behind in the ran, cut in to oncoming traffic and then cut in front of me. I'm sure that what ever emergency it was trying to get to was very important... but then it must be important enough to put the sirens on.
Drive like an idiot by all means... but give us enough notice so that we can be aware that something is about to happen.
 
Wow some of you are being deliberately obtuse.

If the facts found had been that it was not safe for the motorist to move over, the judge would have dismissed the charge for that reason.

Instead he dismissed the charge for the policeman abusing his powers, which is a bull**** judgement and shows the judge did not apply the law correctly.
 
/grammarnazi on

Fine "squashed"? No such phrase is known in law or English.

The word is quashed, without the leading s.

/grammarnazi off
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X