

Learn what to do when an insurance company refuses to pay after a car accident in Turkey in 2026, including rejected claims, compulsory traffic insurance, Insurance Arbitration Commission applications, lawsuits and foreigners’ rights.
Receiving a rejection from an insurance company after a car accident does not necessarily mean that the claimant has no right to compensation. Insurance companies may reject claims because of disputed fault, insufficient documents, questions about causation, policy coverage, vehicle damage, permanent disability or the amount of compensation requested.
In some cases, the rejection may be legally justified. In others, the insurer’s interpretation of the accident, policy or evidence may be challenged.
Under Turkish law, accident victims may have several possible remedies after an insurance company refuses or underpays a claim. Depending on the circumstances, these can include submitting additional evidence, making a formal claim against the insurer, applying to the Insurance Arbitration Commission, or pursuing litigation against the insurer and other legally responsible parties.
Foreign nationals have access to these remedies as well. A foreign tourist, expatriate, employee, investor, student, passenger or pedestrian involved in a traffic accident in Turkey does not automatically lose compensation rights because they live outside the country.
For claims pursued in 2026, it is especially important to use the current traffic insurance rules because Turkey introduced significant changes to the compulsory motor insurance claims system during 2026.
Yes, but a refusal should have a legal and factual basis.
An insurer may dispute whether the loss falls within the scope of the policy or whether the claimant has adequately established the claim.
Common reasons for rejection can include:
The most important first step is therefore to determine why the insurance company refused payment.
An insurer’s rejection is not equivalent to a final court judgment.
The company is stating its position concerning the claim. That position may potentially be challenged through the mechanisms available under Turkish insurance law.
Claimants should therefore avoid concluding that the case is over merely because they receive an email or letter stating that the claim has been rejected.
Instead, the rejection should be analyzed against:
The Insurance Policy
Compulsory Traffic Insurance General Conditions
Accident Evidence
Fault Assessment
Medical Documentation
Expert Reports
Actual Financial Loss
The correct response depends on the reason for rejection.
The claimant should preserve the insurer’s written response and obtain the complete claim documentation available to them.
The file should ideally include:
Claim Application
Insurer’s Rejection Letter
Accident Report
Police or Gendarmerie Records
Photographs and Videos
Insurance Information
Expert Reports
Repair Documents
Medical Records
Income Documents for Bodily Injury Claims
Correspondence with the Insurance Company
A telephone conversation with a claims representative should not be treated as a substitute for clear written documentation.
A vague statement such as “your claim is not covered” may not be enough to understand the actual dispute.
The claimant should determine whether the insurer is arguing that:
The Insured Driver Was Not at Fault
The Damage Was Unrelated to the Accident
The Policy Does Not Cover the Loss
The Claimant Submitted Insufficient Documents
The Requested Amount Is Excessive
The Medical Condition Is Unrelated to the Collision
The Disability Assessment Is Incorrect
These are very different disputes and may require different evidence.
Fault disputes are common.
The insurer may rely on an accident report or other evidence to argue that its insured driver bears no responsibility.
However, the initial fault assessment may potentially be challenged where additional evidence supports a different conclusion.
Relevant evidence may include:
A fault dispute can substantially affect the amount recoverable.
Partial fault does not necessarily mean that the entire compensation claim disappears.
Where several drivers contributed to the accident, the recoverable amount may be affected according to the legally relevant fault allocation.
For example, a claimant may still potentially recover part of the qualifying loss where the other driver bears substantial responsibility for the collision.
The percentages used by the insurer should therefore be reviewed rather than automatically accepted.
This is another frequent source of dispute.
The insurer may argue that some or all of the claimed damage existed before the collision.
Evidence can include:
Accident Scene Photographs
Previous Vehicle Records
Expert Inspection
Repair History
Damage Location
Collision Mechanics
Photographs Taken Before the Accident
The physical relationship between the collision and the claimed damage may require technical examination.
A repaired vehicle may still suffer a reduction in its second-hand market value because it now has an accident and repair history.
This loss is commonly referred to as vehicle diminished value.
Turkey made an important change to the diminished-value claim procedure in June 2026. SEDDK announced on 12 June 2026 that the requirement for a separate diminished-value compensation application was removed as part of the updated traffic insurance General Conditions. The reform was intended to integrate the process more closely with the main material-damage claim and accelerate compensation procedures.
Accordingly, claimants should be cautious about relying on older online articles describing the pre-June 2026 procedure.
Payment of repair costs does not necessarily resolve every category of property damage.
Repair cost and diminished value address different economic consequences.
For example, a vehicle may cost TRY 150,000 to repair but still be worth substantially less than an equivalent accident-free vehicle after the repair.
The claimant should therefore determine precisely what the insurer’s payment covers before signing a release or settlement document.
Permanent disability disputes can be substantially more complex than ordinary vehicle-damage claims.
An insurer may challenge:
Permanent Impairment Percentage
Medical Causation
Medical Report
Income
Fault
Actuarial Calculation
Relationship Between the Accident and Disability
A serious bodily injury claim may therefore require medical and actuarial analysis in addition to legal review.
The claimant should preserve the complete medical history beginning with emergency treatment immediately after the accident.
SEDDK’s official compulsory traffic insurance limits applicable from 1 January through 31 December 2026 include:
Property Damage: TRY 400,000 per vehicle
Property Damage: TRY 800,000 per accident
Health Expenses: TRY 3,600,000 per person
Permanent Disability and Death: TRY 3,600,000 per person
Aggregate bodily injury limits depend on the category of vehicle. For passenger-transport vehicles, for example, the aggregate health-expense and permanent-disability/death limits are TRY 18 million per accident.
These figures represent maximum insurance coverage within the relevant categories. They are not automatic compensation amounts.
SEDDK increased compulsory traffic insurance limits for 2026 to reflect changing economic conditions.
Property damage coverage increased from TRY 300,000 to TRY 400,000, while the bodily injury amount increased from TRY 2.7 million to TRY 3.6 million.
Importantly, SEDDK stated that these increased limits also apply to existing compulsory traffic insurance contracts without requiring an additional premium.
This can be particularly significant in serious injury and high-value vehicle-damage claims.
The policy limit and the existence of liability are separate questions.
If a claimant suffers TRY 700,000 of qualifying property damage while the applicable compulsory insurer’s per-vehicle limit is TRY 400,000, the insurer’s responsibility may be restricted by the applicable coverage ceiling.
However, this does not necessarily mean that the remaining damage simply disappears.
Potential claims against the:
Driver
Vehicle Owner
Vehicle Operator
Employer
Other Legally Responsible Persons
may need to be investigated.
Additional voluntary liability insurance may also exist.
Potentially, yes.
An insurance dispute does not require a complete refusal.
An insurer may acknowledge the claim but pay significantly less than the claimant believes is legally due.
For example, the dispute may concern:
An underpaid insurance claim can therefore require legal review just as much as a completely rejected claim.
Receiving a partial payment is not necessarily problematic by itself, but the legal effect of any accompanying document should be reviewed carefully.
The claimant should determine:
Is the Payment an Advance?
Is It Described as Full and Final Settlement?
Is a Release Being Requested?
Which Damage Categories Does It Cover?
Are Future Claims Being Waived?
This becomes especially important where the accident caused bodily injury and medical treatment is continuing.
A claimant should never sign a settlement document without understanding its legal consequences.
This is particularly important for foreign nationals who may be presented with documents written entirely in Turkish.
A claimant should understand whether the document covers:
Vehicle Damage Only
Diminished Value
Bodily Injury
Permanent Disability
Future Claims
Claims Against Other Parties
The fact that a document is described informally as a “payment form” does not determine its legal effect.
Yes, prior application to the insurer is an important procedural requirement.
The Insurance Arbitration Commission states that a claimant must first make a written application to the relevant insurance organization.
For traffic insurance disputes, if the company sends a final response that does not satisfy the claim, or if 15 days pass without a written final response, an application to the Insurance Arbitration Commission may be possible, subject to the applicable requirements.
Evidence showing when the insurer received the initial application should therefore be preserved.
According to the Insurance Arbitration Commission, relevant documentation includes the claimant’s application to the insurance company and the insurer’s final negative response.
If no response was received within the applicable period, evidence demonstrating that the original application was submitted and received is important.
The claimant should also submit documents supporting the substance of the dispute.
Depending on the claim, these may include:
Potentially, yes.
The Commission states that, for compulsory insurance disputes arising after 18 April 2013, an application may be possible regardless of whether the insurance company is otherwise a member of the arbitration system, subject to the applicable rules.
This makes insurance arbitration an important route in Turkish compulsory traffic insurance disputes.
However, the appropriate strategy depends on the nature and value of the claim.
No.
Insurance arbitration is a specialized dispute-resolution mechanism.
It can be particularly relevant to disputes concerning:
Vehicle Damage
Diminished Value
Permanent Disability Compensation
Insurance Coverage
Underpayment
Rejected Claims
Court litigation remains a separate legal route where available and appropriate.
The correct choice depends on the nature of the dispute, responsible parties, evidence and amount claimed.
Potentially, where the legal and procedural requirements are satisfied.
Litigation may be appropriate in certain disputes, particularly where the case involves complex liability questions, multiple responsible parties or losses exceeding compulsory insurance limits.
Potential defendants may include:
Insurance Company
Driver
Vehicle Owner
Vehicle Operator
Employer
A claimant should not automatically assume that the insurer is the only party that matters.
This does not necessarily mean that no compensation can be recovered from anyone.
Compulsory traffic insurance has defined coverage.
Certain losses may fall outside that coverage while remaining potentially recoverable under the broader civil liability rules applicable to the driver, operator, owner or another responsible person.
This distinction is critical:
No Insurance Coverage Does Not Automatically Mean No Compensation Right.
The legal basis of the underlying loss should therefore be examined separately from the insurance policy.
If the responsible vehicle was uninsured, the claim requires a different analysis.
Turkey’s Guarantee Account may become relevant in specified circumstances, particularly for qualifying bodily injury and death claims involving uninsured vehicles.
Direct claims against the responsible driver, vehicle owner or operator may also be possible depending on the circumstances.
The Guarantee Account should not be assumed to cover every category of property damage or financial loss.
Hit-and-run accidents require immediate action.
Potential evidence includes:
CCTV Footage
Dashcam Recordings
Witness Statements
Partial Registration Plate
Vehicle Description
Police Records
Nearby Business Cameras
Video evidence should be obtained quickly because many surveillance systems automatically overwrite recordings.
For qualifying bodily injury and death claims involving unidentified vehicles, the Guarantee Account framework may also become relevant.
Foreign nationality does not itself justify rejection of an otherwise qualifying claim.
Foreign tourists injured in Turkish traffic accidents may potentially pursue claims relating to:
A foreign claimant should request a clear written explanation if an insurer appears to reject the claim because of documentation or nationality-related issues.
Potentially, yes.
Foreign claimants do not necessarily need to remain physically in Turkey during the entire dispute.
Before leaving Turkey, they should preserve:
Accident Report
Police Records
Medical Documents
Hospital Reports
Insurance Details
Vehicle Records
Photographs
Witness Information
CCTV Information
An appropriately authorized Turkish lawyer may potentially handle subsequent insurance, arbitration and litigation procedures.
Foreign medical documentation may become essential in a bodily injury dispute.
Suppose a tourist suffers spinal injuries in Turkey and returns to Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States or another country for surgery and rehabilitation.
The foreign medical records should demonstrate continuity between:
The Turkish Accident
Initial Injury
Subsequent Treatment
Permanent Consequences
Depending on the proceedings, certified Turkish translations and authentication requirements may apply.
The insurer may question whether foreign income has been adequately established or how it should be treated under the applicable compensation framework.
Foreign claimants should preserve reliable documentation such as:
A high foreign salary should not simply be asserted without documentation.
At the same time, a claimant should not automatically accept a calculation that ignores relevant, properly documented economic circumstances without examining the legal basis.
The Turkish motor insurance claims system underwent several important developments during 2026.
SEDDK amended the Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance General Conditions on 12 June 2026, including changes intended to accelerate claims handling and simplify diminished-value procedures.
On 17 June 2026, SEDDK also issued Circular No. 2026/13 concerning the submission of contact numbers of beneficiaries in compulsory traffic insurance compensation claims.
Further modernization followed in July 2026. SEDDK introduced Circular No. 2026/21 concerning the Alo 193 Insurance Claim Notification and Complaint Line and Circular No. 2026/22 concerning motor vehicle insurance damage applications through the Common Claim Notification Center.
These developments mean that claimants pursuing compensation in 2026 should rely on current procedures rather than older guides describing the claims system before the reforms.
One of the biggest mistakes is doing nothing.
A claimant may receive a rejection and assume that challenging a large insurance company is impossible.
Another major mistake is accepting a very low payment simply because the insurer describes it as its “final calculation.”
Neither approach necessarily reflects the claimant’s legal position.
The insurer’s reasoning should be compared with the evidence and applicable law.
Depending on the dispute, useful evidence may include:
The evidence should directly address the reason given by the insurer for rejecting or reducing the claim.
Yes. Insurance and traffic accident claims are subject to limitation and procedural rules.
The applicable period can vary according to the nature of the claim, underlying liability and circumstances of the accident, including whether the incident also constitutes a criminal offence.
Claimants should therefore not rely on a generalized statement that every rejected traffic insurance claim has the same deadline.
More importantly, evidence may disappear long before the legal limitation period expires.
Legal assessment can become particularly important where:
In high-value cases, a rejected insurance claim can involve medical, actuarial, technical and legal issues simultaneously.
Obtain the insurer’s written rejection, identify the precise reason, preserve your original claim application and gather evidence addressing the disputed issue. A rejection should be analyzed rather than automatically treated as final.
Potentially, yes. Depending on the circumstances, additional documentation, Insurance Arbitration Commission proceedings or litigation may be available.
The Insurance Arbitration Commission states that, for traffic insurance, an application may be possible where the insurer has issued an unsatisfactory final response or 15 days have passed without a written final response, subject to the applicable procedural requirements.
Potentially, yes. A dispute can concern an underpayment as well as a complete rejection. Repair costs, diminished value, fault, permanent disability and compensation calculations may all be disputed.
For 2026, SEDDK lists TRY 400,000 per vehicle for property damage and TRY 3.6 million per person for health expenses and for permanent disability/death, with applicable aggregate accident limits depending on the coverage category and vehicle type.
Potentially, yes. Foreign nationality does not itself prevent a claimant from challenging the rejection of an otherwise qualifying traffic accident compensation claim.
Generally, the Commission requires the claimant first to make a written application to the relevant insurance organization. Evidence of that prior application should be preserved.
Potential claims against the driver, vehicle owner, operator, employer or other legally responsible persons may need to be investigated. Additional voluntary liability insurance may also be relevant.
Potentially, yes. A foreign claimant may authorize a Turkish lawyer to handle relevant proceedings, subject to appropriate power-of-attorney and document requirements.
Not before understanding its legal effect. Determine whether the document releases only a specific claim or attempts to settle all current and future claims arising from the accident.
An insurance company’s refusal to pay does not automatically determine whether a traffic accident victim has a valid compensation claim.
A proper assessment requires examination of the reason for rejection, accident evidence, fault allocation, insurance coverage, policy limits, medical documentation, expert reports and the full amount of the claimant’s loss.
This is especially important in cases involving permanent disability, fatal accidents, substantial vehicle damage, diminished value or foreign accident victims whose medical treatment and income documentation are located outside Turkey.
Our law office provides professional legal assistance concerning rejected traffic insurance claims, underpaid car accident compensation, vehicle damage, diminished value, permanent disability compensation, fatal accident claims, Insurance Arbitration Commission applications and insurance litigation in Turkey.
Fırat Fesih Kaya assists Turkish and foreign accident victims with reviewing insurance rejection decisions, evaluating claim calculations, challenging disputed fault assessments and determining whether additional claims can be pursued against the driver, vehicle owner, operator, employer or other responsible parties.
Foreign nationals whose claims have been rejected by a Turkish insurance company may contact our law office for a case-specific assessment. Professional legal review can help determine whether the insurer’s rejection is supported by the applicable insurance framework or whether arbitration, litigation or another compensation remedy should be considered.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yıldırım Tower No: 148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey
For professional legal support concerning an insurance company’s refusal to pay after a car accident in Turkey in 2026, you may contact our law office for an individual assessment of the rejection, fault, insurance coverage, compensation calculation and available arbitration or litigation remedies.