Skip to main content

Middle-lane hogging rife despite the threat of a fine

A year on from the first driver being prosecuted for middle-lane hogging, almost a third of motorists still admit to hogging the middle lane of a motorway, according to new research by motoring website Confused.com. Meanwhile, new freedom of information police data requested by Confused.com reveals just 135 cases of middle-lane hogging have been recorded since spot fines were introduced by the government in 2013 to tackle careless driving.
September 16, 2016 Read time: 2 mins

A year on from the first driver being prosecuted for middle-lane hogging, almost a third of motorists still admit to hogging the middle lane of a motorway, according to new research by motoring website Confused.com. Meanwhile, new freedom of information police data requested by Confused.com reveals just 135 cases of middle-lane hogging have been recorded since spot fines were introduced by the government in 2013 to tackle careless driving.

A further look at the FOI data reveals the actual number of drivers caught middle-lane hogging could be much higher. Careless driving also includes tailgating, undertaking and driving too slowly - offences which are often a direct result of middle-lane hogging, even if they’re not recorded as such. In total, 1,158 drivers have fallen foul of careless driving spot fines.

Despite the fact that many drivers admit to hogging the middle lane, the practice is deemed selfish by over half (51%) of other road users. An additional 48% believe it is a leading cause of increased traffic congestion. Meanwhile, over one in 10 drivers have experienced a vehicle collision or near miss on account of another road user hogging the middle lane.

Many drivers believe more needs to be done to make motorists aware of the rules of middle-lane hogging, with half of them saying motorway signs should be used to raise awareness of the dangers.

The research also shows that almost one in five drivers say they have never been taught about middle-lane hogging, while almost two-fifths of UK drivers are unaware that the practice is an offence punishable by at least three penalty points and a £100 fine.

Related Content

  • Increased automation is already improving road safety
    April 20, 2017
    Richard Cuerden considers how many of the technologies developed as part of a move toward autonomous vehicles are already being deployed as ADAS improve road safety. The drive to create autonomous vehicles has caused a re-evaluation of what is needed to safely navigate today’s roads and the development of systems that can replace the driver in many scenarios. However, many manufacturers are not waiting for ‘tomorrow’ and are already incorporating these systems in their new cars as Advanced Driver Assistanc
  • Developments in urban traffic management and control
    February 1, 2012
    Mark Cartwright, Centaur Consulting, discusses developments in urban traffic management and control. Despite the concept of UTMC (Urban Traffic Management and Control) having been around for some years now, there remains a significant rump of confusion as to its relationship with its similar-sounding cousin UTC (Urban Traffic Control). To many people, the two are one and the same. However, this is not the case.
  • Growth of ANPR applications for enforcement, tolling and more
    February 1, 2012
    Automatic number plate recognition continues to find new applications beyond the traditional. In coming years, we can expect the application set to grow significantly Moore's Law has seen to it that computer processing power has improved out of all comparison in the 30-plus years since the first working Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system was created by the UK's Police Scientific Development Branch. The attendant increases in systems' capabilities have resulted in ANPR being deployed globally
  • A global standard for enforcement systems – is it necessary?
    May 30, 2013
    Jason Barnes speaks to leading figures from the automated enforcement sector about whether a truly international standard for automated enforcement systems is necessary or can ever be achieved. Recent reports of further press controversy in the US over automated enforcement (see ‘Focusing on accuracy?’, ITS International raise again the issue of standards and what constitutes ‘good enough’ in terms of system accuracy and overall solution effectiveness. Comparatively, automated enforcement has always expe