I cannot follow this account at all. Any chance of a link to streetview or a diagram?

Think I get it now. When you mentioned diagonal hatching I was thinking of those white diagonals that create virtual traffic isalnds.

So you were turning right out of the B&M bargains road amd he was on the major road overtaking stationery traffic to access Morrison's filling station.

The box is only on the nearside to stop traffic queueing for the lights blocking acess to from the B&M road?

Looks like a 50/50 to me at best. Absent the box markings, which might be a red herring if he only pulled in to avoid oncoming traffic it would be your failure to properly observe.

If you were taking all sensible precautions before committing yourself to pulling out, it seems to me that splitting the blame 50/50 would be unfair. And if you were stationary at the time of the collision, having only just got to the position where you had a view of oncoming traffic, I can't see what else you could be expected to do.

Edited by FP on 05/01/2013 at 15:22

I did take precautions when pulling I could see no traffic moving past the stationary traffic that was wait for the lights to change, and as I pulled into the filter box I could clearly see to the right and there were two car’s at the end of the queue just before where the diagonal hatching started.

There should of only been the one lane of traffic and not two the diagonal hatching is in place to protect traffic turning right and as I had already committed myself and was in the filter I then had to pull forward a little more to check the for traffic coming from the left so I could make sure it was safe to proceed.

Just because someone thinks it a short cut to go across the diagonal hatching and a cross the filter box I was in I cannot see how that can be 100% my fault. I know that road quite well and have see people go across it many times, I have also been in the lane that the stationary traffic was in indicating as I approached the filets box for turning into Morrison only to have someone shot down the right side of me to get into and stopping me from entering the box myself. So I took care and made sure nothing was coming as I entered the filter box.

And it should have only been one lane I had to cross and not two as in your scenario daveyjp, and a diagonal hatching is not a lane and you should not use it as one when approaching a junction.

I think 50:50 is the best I can expect but it does seem a little unfair to me as I was already established in the filter box had look and made sure it was clear on the right and not traffic was coming over the diagonal hatching, only then I looked left as that was the lane I was going turning right and had to pull forward a bit more to make sure it was safe to go.

Then only to look back right to see that someone had gone over the hatching when I should have been very visible to them before they entered the hatching but they said they seen me and only thought to themselves when are they going to stop when they should of stopped themselves, and if not for the swerving out they would of went into the side of me.

Think I would argue vehemently against 50/50, 90/10 ot 80/20 might be more appropriate, however this is insurance companies we're talking about here.......

Regardless of it being 50/50 or 90/10 you would still have to pay your excess and it would still be an accident to declare at renewal.

Therefore you would be exactly the same amount out of pocket initially and at renewal thus is it really worth the time and hassle.

I also found this in another post.

Diagonal Hatching - 1400ted Some years ago, and this may be a regional thing, I heard these areas referred to as ' ghost islands '.......both by the police and highways workers.
Some years ago, my son was let out of his work gates by a driver in a queue of standing traffic to turn right. As he nosed out he was hit by a woman using the hatchings to overtake the queue to make a right turn later on. She was prosecuted by the police...I can't remember the charge but the bobby said to me that she shouldn't have been on the ' ghost island '

This may indicate that they were painted on an area of road where a proper kerbed island would have been useful but not installed due, possibly to the expense. I tend to treat them as a proper island. I think the continuous ones along the centre of some roads are different, not meant to be treated as an island but as an extension of the double white line system with a bit extra between the lines to keep traffic flows further apart.

Ted

from here www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=17644

Sounds like a good result for you!