

Has a Turkish insurance company rejected your claim? This 2026 guide explains how foreigners can challenge insurance claim denials in Turkey, including written objections, expert evidence, Insurance Arbitration Commission applications, lawsuits, compensation and practical steps after rejection.
A foreign national who purchases insurance in Turkey may assume that a covered loss will automatically result in payment. In practice, insurance companies may reject claims because of alleged policy exclusions, late notification, insufficient documentation, pre-existing conditions, incorrect declarations, questions concerning causation or disputes about whether the event falls within the scope of coverage.
A rejection does not necessarily mean that the insurer is legally correct.
Foreign policyholders, injured third parties, property owners, drivers, business owners and other beneficiaries may have several routes for challenging an insurer’s decision. Depending on the insurance type and circumstances, these can include a formal claim or objection to the insurance company, an application to the Insurance Arbitration Commission, regulatory complaints and litigation before the competent court.
For foreign nationals, one particularly important procedural point is often overlooked: the Insurance Arbitration Commission currently states that foreign nationals cannot use its standard online application process because online filing requires identity verification through the national digital-government system. Foreign nationals must therefore make a physical application under the Commission’s current procedure. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
The correct strategy begins with understanding exactly why the claim was rejected.
Yes.
Being a foreign national does not mean that an insurance company’s rejection must simply be accepted.
Depending on the legal relationship, policy and type of insurance, foreigners can pursue rights arising under Turkish insurance law and the relevant contract.
The dispute may concern many different policies, including motor insurance, comprehensive vehicle insurance, private health insurance, property insurance, workplace insurance, travel-related coverage, liability insurance, cargo insurance or other commercial policies.
The first question is therefore not nationality.
The first question is:
Was the insurer legally and contractually entitled to reject the claim?
Insurance companies can rely on different grounds depending on the policy.
Common rejection arguments include alleged non-coverage of the event, an exclusion in the policy, failure to disclose material information, late notification, insufficient proof of loss, disagreement about causation, alleged intentional conduct, pre-existing damage, policy expiry or disputes concerning whether the claimant is legally entitled to compensation.
A rejection letter should therefore be examined together with:
the policy, general and special conditions, claim documents, expert reports, photographs, medical records, accident documents, correspondence and evidence establishing the amount of the loss.
The insurer’s explanation should never be reviewed in isolation.
A telephone conversation with a call-center employee is not enough.
If the insurer says:
“Your claim is not covered.”
ask for the decision and its basis in writing.
The rejection should ideally identify the contractual or legal reason on which the insurer relies.
Written documentation becomes particularly important if the dispute later proceeds to arbitration or litigation.
Foreign policyholders sometimes receive only a short policy document without carefully examining the full coverage conditions.
Obtain and preserve all relevant documentation, including the policy schedule, endorsements, additional clauses, general conditions and special conditions applicable to the policy.
The key issue is often whether the exclusion relied upon by the insurer actually applies to the specific event.
Suppose the insurer states:
“The loss is excluded under the policy.”
That is not the end of the analysis.
The next questions are:
Which exclusion?
What does the clause actually say?
Does the factual event fall within that exclusion?
Was the exclusion properly incorporated into the insurance relationship?
Is the insurer interpreting the provision too broadly?
Insurance disputes frequently turn on the relationship between policy wording and the actual facts.
A clear timeline can be extremely useful.
Record:
when the policy began, when the insured event occurred, when the insurer was notified, what documents were requested, when documents were supplied, whether an expert inspection occurred and when the claim was rejected.
This can reveal whether the insurer’s procedural argument is factually correct.
It also helps identify deadlines that may affect subsequent legal remedies.
Keep emails, letters, claim portal messages, SMS notifications and relevant correspondence.
Do not delete communications simply because the claim has already been rejected.
An insurer may later rely on a different explanation from the reason initially given.
A complete communication history can therefore become valuable evidence.
Many disputes involve technical assessment.
For example, a motor insurer may dispute the cause or amount of vehicle damage. A property insurer may argue that water damage resulted from inadequate maintenance rather than a covered event. A health insurer may characterize treatment as related to a pre-existing condition.
Where an expert assessment influenced the rejection, the claimant should determine what technical findings the insurer relied upon.
The insurer’s expert assessment is not necessarily the final technical truth.
Where the rejection depends on engineering, vehicle damage, medical causation, fire damage, valuation or another specialized issue, an independent professional opinion may materially strengthen the claim.
The appropriate expert depends on the dispute.
A lawyer should not attempt to replace a doctor, engineer, loss adjuster or technical specialist where professional expertise is required.
Some insurance disputes concern complete rejection.
Others concern underpayment.
For example, the insurer may accept that a motor accident is covered but offer substantially less than the actual repair loss.
A property insurer may acknowledge fire coverage but dispute the replacement value.
A bodily injury claim may be accepted while the parties disagree about disability-related compensation.
The claimant should therefore determine both:
whether coverage exists and how much compensation should be paid.
Before pursuing insurance arbitration, the claimant generally needs to make the required prior application to the relevant insurance organization.
The submission should be more than an emotional complaint.
It should identify:
the policy or claim, insured event, amount claimed, evidence, reason the rejection is disputed and requested payment.
Supporting documents should be attached systematically.
This stage can materially affect later arbitration because it establishes what was demanded from the insurer and what evidence was provided.
A common mistake is sending several pages explaining how unfair the situation feels without identifying the legal and factual issues.
A stronger objection usually separates:
coverage, facts, evidence, loss calculation and requested relief.
For example:
The event occurred during the policy period. The policy covers the relevant risk. The exclusion relied upon does not apply because the factual circumstances are different. The documented loss is a specified amount. Payment is therefore requested.
A clear claim is easier to evaluate and later easier to present to an arbitrator or court.
Potentially, yes, subject to the jurisdictional and procedural requirements applicable to the dispute.
The Insurance Arbitration Commission provides an alternative mechanism for resolving qualifying disputes between insurance-sector participants and persons claiming rights under insurance relationships.
For foreign claimants, however, there is an important practical difference.
The Commission’s current application guidance states that its online application mechanism uses digital-government identity verification and therefore foreign nationals can only submit physical applications under the current procedure. They must complete the application form and submit it together with the required supporting documents. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
This is especially important for foreigners living outside Turkey.
A foreign claimant may find the Commission’s online system and assume the entire case can be initiated remotely through the ordinary electronic application route.
The Commission expressly states otherwise for foreign nationals under its current procedure. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
The application therefore needs to be planned accordingly.
Where the claimant is outside Turkey, representation by a Turkish lawyer may be particularly useful.
The exact documents depend on the dispute, but a foreign claimant should generally prepare the application documentation together with evidence supporting the insurance claim.
This can include the insurance policy, insurer’s rejection, proof of the previous application to the insurer, accident or loss documentation, expert reports, photographs, invoices, medical records where relevant, payment evidence and documents proving the amount claimed.
Identity documentation is also important.
The Commission currently states that an application should include a copy of the applicant’s identity document or an equivalent identity document such as a passport. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
Yes, subject to proper authorization.
However, the power of attorney deserves particular attention.
The Insurance Arbitration Commission states that where an application is made through an attorney, the power of attorney submitted to the file must contain specific authority concerning alternative dispute resolution methods or direct application to the Insurance Arbitration Commission, referring to the applicable procedural rule. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
Foreign claimants should therefore avoid assuming that every generic power of attorney automatically contains sufficient authority for insurance arbitration.
This should be checked before filing.
Yes.
Application fees depend on the amount in dispute.
The Insurance Arbitration Commission publishes the applicable fee schedule and also identifies separate notification expenses.
For applications and objections made from January 1, 2026, the Commission currently lists notification expenses of TRY 75 where the applicant provides a valid registered electronic mail address and TRY 325 where no such address is provided. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
Because tariffs can change, the current fee should always be checked immediately before filing.
Depending on the amount and circumstances, the insurance arbitration system includes objection mechanisms.
The Commission publishes a separate objection application procedure and fee structure. It states that the applicable objection fee is calculated according to the total amount in dispute, rather than merely the amount awarded against the objecting party. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
Therefore, a claimant who receives an unfavorable arbitration decision should immediately determine:
whether an objection is available, what deadline applies and what procedural requirements must be satisfied.
Waiting can result in the loss of an available remedy.
Potentially, yes.
Insurance disputes may also be pursued before the competent Turkish courts where the applicable procedural and jurisdictional requirements are satisfied.
The appropriate court and required pre-litigation steps depend on the legal nature of the dispute.
A private consumer’s dispute with an insurer may not necessarily follow exactly the same procedural route as a commercial company’s multimillion-value industrial insurance claim.
Jurisdiction should therefore be determined before filing.
There is no universal answer.
Insurance arbitration can be attractive because it is designed specifically for insurance disputes and may offer a more specialized and streamlined procedure.
Court proceedings may nevertheless be appropriate or necessary in particular cases.
The choice should consider:
the insurance type, amount claimed, evidence, complexity, insurer, availability of arbitration, urgency and likely need for expert examination.
The claimant should not automatically select one route merely because another person used it successfully in a different insurance dispute.
Motor claims are among the most common insurance disputes involving foreigners.
A foreign driver, passenger, pedestrian or vehicle owner may encounter disputes involving:
vehicle repair costs, total loss, diminished value, bodily injury, permanent disability, loss of earnings or fatal accident compensation.
In June and July 2026, SEDDK introduced several developments concerning motor insurance claims, including amendments relating to compulsory motor liability insurance and the establishment of a common motor claim notification framework. (SEDDK)
Foreign claimants dealing with a motor accident should therefore ensure that their claim follows the procedures applicable at the time of the accident and application.
On July 24, 2026, SEDDK announced new measures concerning an Alo 193 insurance claim notification and complaint line and a common claim notification center for motor vehicle insurance claims. (SEDDK)
These are genuine 2026 developments.
Foreign drivers and injured parties should therefore distinguish older internet guidance from the current claim-notification framework when dealing with motor insurance disputes.
The regulatory landscape is evolving, and the procedure applicable to a particular claim should be checked according to the date and insurance category involved.
Health insurance disputes can be particularly difficult for foreign residents.
Common disagreements may concern:
pre-existing conditions, waiting periods, excluded treatment, emergency treatment, hospital expenses, medical necessity or whether a particular diagnosis falls within coverage.
The claimant should obtain the medical records and determine exactly what medical basis the insurer used for rejection.
A vague statement that:
“This condition existed before the policy”
should be compared with actual medical history and the policy terms.
SEDDK’s current regulations page confirms that the Private Health Insurance Regulation was amended in October 2025, meaning health-insurance disputes in 2026 should be evaluated against the currently applicable regulatory framework rather than older summaries. (SEDDK)
Foreign property owners may face claim disputes after:
fire, flooding, water leakage, storms, theft or other property damage.
Insurers may dispute the cause of damage, coverage, value of the loss or compliance with policy obligations.
The owner should preserve physical evidence wherever possible.
Photographs and video should be taken before major repairs unless emergency work is necessary to prevent further damage.
Invoices and technical reports should also be retained.
Large fire claims frequently involve causation disputes.
An insurer may investigate whether the fire resulted from an electrical problem, negligence, intentional conduct or another cause relevant to coverage.
For commercial properties, the dispute can also involve business interruption and consequential financial losses.
Independent technical evidence can become critical.
Water damage disputes commonly involve disagreement over whether the event was sudden or resulted from long-term deterioration.
The difference can be decisive under the applicable policy.
The claimant should therefore document the origin of the leak and damage before extensive repairs alter the evidence.
Foreign travelers may encounter disputes involving emergency medical expenses, trip cancellation, baggage or other insured travel risks.
The wording of the particular policy is especially important.
A purchaser should not assume that a policy sold as “travel insurance” covers every problem occurring during travel.
Foreign-owned companies operating in Turkey can face substantially larger insurance disputes.
These may concern:
factory fires, machinery damage, warehouse losses, business interruption, employer liability, professional liability, cargo losses or other commercial risks.
Commercial claims can involve substantial expert evidence and complex policy interpretation.
The claim should therefore be managed as a legal dispute from an early stage where significant amounts are involved.
This is a serious but fact-specific issue.
Insurance contracts often involve disclosure obligations.
However, the insurer’s assertion that information was omitted does not automatically resolve:
whether the information was actually requested, whether it was material, what the policyholder knew and what legal consequence should follow from the alleged omission.
The original proposal forms, questionnaires and communications from the policy-formation stage can therefore become important evidence.
Do not assume that every late notification automatically destroys the entire insurance claim.
The legal consequences depend on the applicable insurance relationship, policy wording, circumstances of the delay and its significance.
If the claimant was hospitalized, outside the country or otherwise unable to report promptly, the surrounding facts should be documented.
The insurer’s rejection should be legally reviewed rather than accepted solely because a notification deadline was mentioned.
Insurers frequently request additional documents.
The claimant should keep a clear record showing:
what was requested, when it was requested and when it was supplied.
If a requested document does not exist or cannot reasonably be obtained, this should be explained in writing.
Repeated telephone conversations are a poor substitute for a documented claim file.
Silence can also trigger the need for further legal action once the applicable prerequisites and waiting periods have been satisfied.
The claimant should preserve evidence showing when the insurer received the application.
This is one reason formal written submissions and provable delivery are important.
SEDDK provides channels for insurance-related complaints and notifications.
Its official contact information currently includes an electronic mechanism for submitting complaints and reports. (SEDDK)
However, a regulatory complaint should not automatically be confused with a claim for a binding monetary award.
If the objective is to recover compensation, the claimant should separately evaluate the appropriate arbitration or judicial remedy.
This distinction is extremely important.
Reporting conduct to the insurance regulator and obtaining payment from the insurer are different objectives.
A foreign claimant who believes an insurer has acted improperly may consider regulatory channels.
But if the claimant wants:
EUR 100,000 in unpaid insurance compensation, for example, the appropriate dispute-resolution route must also be pursued.
Do not allow a regulatory complaint to cause important claim deadlines to expire.
The strongest evidence depends on the insurance category.
For a vehicle claim, relevant evidence may include accident documentation, photographs, repair invoices and expert reports.
For bodily injury, medical documentation and disability evidence may be critical.
For property damage, photographs, repair estimates, invoices and engineering reports may matter.
For business interruption, accounting and financial records can become essential.
The legal claim should be built around the evidence necessary to prove both:
coverage and amount.
A foreign claimant may rely on documents issued outside Turkey.
Depending on the document and proceeding, translation, certification or other formalities may be required.
This can arise where the claimant’s medical treatment occurred abroad or where foreign invoices, employment records or company documentation are used to prove the loss.
These issues should be identified early rather than immediately before filing.
An insurer may offer partial payment in exchange for a settlement, release or discharge.
Before accepting, determine whether signing the document prevents further claims.
This becomes especially important in bodily injury cases where the long-term consequences of an accident may not yet be fully known.
Receiving immediate money can be attractive, but a broad release may have significant legal consequences.
Foreign claimants sometimes accept inadequate settlements because they believe they must remain physically in Turkey throughout the dispute.
That is not necessarily the case.
Depending on the procedure and proper representation, legal steps may be handled through a lawyer.
A claimant should therefore evaluate the actual value of the case before accepting a reduced payment solely for convenience.
A foreign claimant should generally consider the following sequence:
The correct order can vary depending on the policy and dispute, but evidence preservation should begin immediately.
Yes. A foreign claimant can potentially pursue contractual and statutory remedies against an insurer depending on the policy, claim and applicable procedure.
Potentially, yes. However, the Commission currently states that foreign nationals cannot use its ordinary online filing system and must submit a physical application. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
The Commission states that online applications require identity verification through the national digital-government system and therefore foreign nationals must use physical filing under the current procedure. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
Yes, subject to appropriate representation authority. For Insurance Arbitration Commission proceedings, the Commission specifically requires the power of attorney to contain the necessary special authority for alternative dispute resolution or direct application to the Commission. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
No. Disputes can also concern partial payment, low valuation or disagreement over the amount of compensation.
Ask for the exact policy provision relied upon and compare the wording with the actual circumstances of the insured event. An exclusion should not simply be accepted because the insurer refers to it.
SEDDK currently provides an electronic channel for insurance complaints and notifications. (SEDDK) However, regulatory complaints and legal proceedings seeking compensation serve different purposes.
SEDDK announced the Alo 193 insurance claim notification and complaint framework in July 2026, together with developments concerning common notification of motor vehicle insurance claims. (SEDDK)
Potentially, yes. The policy wording, medical history, reason for rejection and applicable health insurance rules should be examined together.
Ideally as soon as a substantial claim is rejected or seriously underpaid. Early review can help preserve evidence, prevent procedural mistakes and identify the correct arbitration or litigation route before deadlines expire.
An insurance company’s rejection letter is a position taken by the insurer; it is not automatically the final legal determination of the claimant’s rights.
A successful challenge usually depends on identifying why the insurer rejected the claim and then testing that reason against the policy wording, applicable insurance rules and available evidence.
For foreign claimants, additional procedural issues can arise concerning physical arbitration applications, powers of attorney, overseas documents, translations and pursuing proceedings while living outside Turkey. The Insurance Arbitration Commission’s current rule requiring foreign nationals to use physical rather than ordinary online applications makes procedural planning particularly important. (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu)
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign individuals, international investors and foreign-owned businesses with rejected insurance claims, motor insurance disputes, private health insurance disputes, property insurance claims, fire and water damage claims, bodily injury compensation, permanent disability claims, commercial insurance disputes, Insurance Arbitration Commission proceedings and insurance litigation in Turkey.
A rejected or underpaid claim should be reviewed together with the complete policy, rejection letter, expert evidence and loss documentation. Where significant compensation is involved, the applicable arbitration or court procedure and relevant deadlines should be identified before prolonged correspondence with the insurer creates additional procedural risk.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yıldırım Tower, Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey