Operation of lanes in a one way system?

[kira000]

Hoping someone will be able to definateively confirm or deny something for me.

On a normal road, with multiple lanes, the cars in the nearside lanes should not undertake traffic in the outside lane/s.

I have been told that on a one way system with multiple lanes leading off to different destinations, the traffic can legally move independently. I.e if staying in your lane and you go past a car on your right, it is not considered undertaking.

Is this correct? If so, can anyone point me at something in writing that confirms this?

Thank you!

[denis567]

It is quite true, in a one way street, you can pass on either side. Unfortunately I cannot point you to the relevent part of the Highway Code, but I am sure someone will be able to do so.

[pauln90]

Extract from Highway Code




143

One-way streets. Traffic MUST travel in the direction indicated by signs. Buses and/or cycles may have a contraflow lane. Choose the correct lane for your exit as soon as you can. Do not change lanes suddenly. Unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise, you should use

the left-hand lane when going left
the right-hand lane when going right
the most appropriate lane when going straight ahead. Remember � traffic could be passing on both sides
[Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & RTRA sects 5 & 8]

[kira000]

Great!
Whooosh.... there went flying the only defence of the tw*t of a lorry driver who went into the side of my car when he decided to pull into my lane!!!

Thank you!!!

[Panic Button]

Was he indicating when you decided to pull up the left side of his lorry?

[Pigletion]

Also, on a multi lane road it is not undertaking to pass a car on your right as long as your lane is moving faster than theirs and you remain in your lane (and only overtake using the lane to your right, as is convention). For some reason that sticks in my head from my driving lessons.

It is illegal, however, to use the lane on your left to overtake someone (well undertake), i.e start in right lane, move left to pass car in front and then move right again.

[kira000]

No Panic Button, I wasnt actually going past him. I was already ahead of him in my lane, where i had always been, when he (without indicating) decided that he was too wide to fit in his (centre) lane and that he needed to use my lane too. So he moved without looking and went into my rear wheel arch.

[Panic Button]

Well that sounds like his fault, but that doesn't match with your original question.

[kira000]

The lorry driver is not accepting liability. His excuse being that i was undertaing him. Which matches perfectly with what my original question was.
The fact is thats not what happened and he is clutching at straws because i was in fact ahead of him as i was the first off the lights in my lane, and he was a few vehicles back in his.

However, even if i HAD been undertaking him, as he argued, given that it is a one way street, undertaking would have been acceptable, and the highway code puts an onus on him to be aware of traffic passing on both sides. Which he clearly would not have been doing, and without indicating!
So either way,whether one accepts my story that i was ahead or not, really, its his fault.

[paraffin]

Years ago I was in your situation almost exactly. I was driving my car in the nearside lane when a lorry on my right made a manoeuvre to its left, as a result colliding with my rear offside, causing damage to my car.

I put the matter in the hands of my insurance company and although the lorry driver tried to claim innocence his insurance company eventually paid up.

Stick to your guns. He's probably bluffing like the guy who hit my car was.

[kira000]

Thanks for all your answers guys (and gals).
My insurance company seem quite certain that i'm not at fault, and have settled all the costs directly without me paying an excess, but the third party is still disputing.
I'm going to put my foot down and refuse to accept liability if they try to go 50-50.