Shit luck, awful to hear of your friend's injury. That's not a pedestrian crossing for which any marking requirements exist (the 'look right' is strictly optional). It's merely a kerb build-out to facilitate crossing (one of the variety of things sometimes referred to as 'courtesy crossing' with a central 'refuge'). It's a poor design that I'd never advocate. As far as I can see from the picture, all the required markings are there--for the car parking bays either side of it. Technically, you shouldn't have been riding in the parking bays but in the adjacent traffic lane. It was probably your misfortune that no cars were parked there, so it wasn't obvious enough that there were those bays. I've heard before of this sort of design catching people out--basically, for cycling you want even kerblines and any transitions should be gradual, which this design isn't.
Shit luck, awful to hear of your friend's injury. That's not a pedestrian crossing for which any marking requirements exist (the 'look right' is strictly optional). It's merely a kerb build-out to facilitate crossing (one of the variety of things sometimes referred to as 'courtesy crossing' with a central 'refuge'). It's a poor design that I'd never advocate. As far as I can see from the picture, all the required markings are there--for the car parking bays either side of it. Technically, you shouldn't have been riding in the parking bays but in the adjacent traffic lane. It was probably your misfortune that no cars were parked there, so it wasn't obvious enough that there were those bays. I've heard before of this sort of design catching people out--basically, for cycling you want even kerblines and any transitions should be gradual, which this design isn't.