

Injured in an e-scooter accident in Turkey? Learn who may be liable, whether insurance covers e-scooter accidents, how compensation is claimed, and what foreign riders, pedestrians and motorists should know in 2026.
Electric scooters have become a common part of urban transportation in Turkey, particularly through shared e-scooter platforms. Their convenience, however, has created a growing category of accidents involving pedestrians, cars, motorcycles, bicycles and other e-scooters. The resulting compensation cases can be considerably more complicated than an ordinary car accident because the insurance rules applicable to conventional motor vehicles do not automatically apply to every e-scooter accident.
The first question after an e-scooter accident should therefore not simply be “Which insurance company must pay?” The legal analysis must first determine how the accident occurred, whether another motor vehicle was involved, who was at fault, whether the scooter was privately owned or provided through a shared platform, whether a platform operator may bear separate responsibility and which insurance policies, if any, cover the particular loss.
This distinction is especially important in 2026 because Turkey adopted significant amendments to its traffic legislation in February 2026. The amendments expressly provide for the legal liability of electric scooter riders to be governed by general liability rules, although that particular provision is scheduled to enter into force on January 1, 2027. (Trafik Bakanlığı)
Potentially, yes. The answer depends primarily on who caused the accident.
If an e-scooter rider is struck by a negligent car, taxi, bus, truck, motorcycle or other insured motor vehicle, the rider may potentially pursue compensation under the liability and compulsory motor insurance framework applicable to the responsible motor vehicle.
The fact that the injured person was riding an e-scooter does not automatically remove compensation rights.
For example, if a car makes an unsafe turn and strikes an e-scooter rider lawfully travelling through the roadway, the responsible car’s compulsory motor liability insurance may become an important source of compensation for covered bodily injuries.
The situation is very different where the e-scooter rider causes the accident without another responsible insured motor vehicle being involved.
This is one of the most important issues in e-scooter accident claims.
An e-scooter should not automatically be treated like a conventional automobile or motorcycle for compulsory motor insurance purposes.
Turkey’s liability system distinguishes between motor vehicles subject to the statutory operator-liability and compulsory motor insurance framework and other vehicles whose liability may instead be governed by general legal principles.
This means that a person injured by an e-scooter cannot simply assume that there will be a compulsory motor insurer standing behind the rider in the same way there normally would be after being struck by a car.
The exact vehicle classification and accident circumstances must therefore be established before any insurance strategy is developed.
A major legislative development occurred in February 2026.
According to the Turkish National Police Traffic Directorate’s official explanation of the amendments that entered into force on February 27, 2026, the legislation provides that the legal liability of drivers of non-motorized vehicles and electric scooters will be subject to general provisions. Importantly, this particular provision is scheduled to enter into force on January 1, 2027, rather than immediately with the other amendments. (Trafik Bakanlığı)
Accordingly, accidents occurring during the transition period should be analyzed according to the rules actually in force on the accident date.
This is particularly important for legal content published in 2026 because applying a rule scheduled for 2027 to a 2026 accident could produce an incorrect liability analysis.
This is generally the clearest insurance scenario.
If a motor vehicle subject to compulsory motor insurance causes the accident, the injured e-scooter rider may potentially pursue the responsible vehicle’s insurer for covered bodily injury losses.
The claim may involve permanent disability, temporary economic loss, reduced earning capacity and other legally compensable consequences depending on the injuries and applicable coverage.
The rider’s own conduct must also be examined.
If the motorist is entirely responsible, the claim will be evaluated accordingly. If both the motorist and e-scooter rider contributed to the collision, shared fault can affect the compensation calculation.
A taxi accident should be investigated through the same basic framework applicable to other motor vehicle collisions.
The taxi’s compulsory motor insurer should be identified, together with the driver and vehicle operator.
The victim should preserve the registration number, accident report, photographs and camera evidence.
Where injuries are catastrophic and damages may exceed available insurance coverage, the liability of other legally responsible persons should also be investigated.
These accidents can cause devastating injuries because an e-scooter provides virtually no protection against a large commercial vehicle.
Spinal injuries, traumatic brain injuries, amputations and fatal injuries can occur.
The claim should identify the driver, vehicle operator, compulsory motor insurer and any additional liability insurance.
Where the bus or truck belongs to a company, separate business or employer-related liability issues may also need investigation depending on the circumstances.
Potentially, yes.
An e-scooter rider can cause serious injuries to a pedestrian, particularly an elderly person or someone struck unexpectedly from behind.
The difficulty may concern the source from which compensation can actually be recovered.
Unlike an ordinary car accident, the pedestrian should not automatically assume that a compulsory motor liability policy exists for the e-scooter.
The rider’s personal liability may therefore become particularly important.
If the scooter was provided through a shared e-scooter operator, the platform’s contractual arrangements and any applicable insurance coverage should also be investigated.
Shared e-scooter cases require an additional layer of analysis.
Turkey regulates shared e-scooter businesses through the Electric Scooter Regulation. The regulatory framework covers both e-scooters used on public roads and businesses conducting shared e-scooter operations. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
The fact that the scooter was rented through an application does not automatically make the platform liable for every accident.
For example, if the rider ignores a traffic rule and strikes a pedestrian while operating a properly functioning scooter, the rider’s conduct may be central to the case.
However, a different analysis may apply if the accident resulted from a mechanical defect, maintenance failure or another problem attributable to the scooter itself or the way the shared fleet was managed.
Potentially, depending on the cause of the accident.
A shared e-scooter operator should not automatically be treated as responsible simply because its scooter was involved.
The claimant must investigate whether there is an independent basis for liability.
Suppose the scooter’s braking system fails during normal use because of inadequate maintenance. That case raises very different issues from an accident caused exclusively by the rider’s reckless conduct.
Maintenance history, defect reports, inspection information and technical evidence may therefore become critical.
A rider who suffers an accident because the scooter suddenly loses braking capacity should preserve the scooter whenever possible.
The vehicle should not be returned, repaired or altered before relevant evidence is secured where a serious claim is anticipated.
Photographs and videos should be taken immediately.
The rider should also preserve application records identifying the exact scooter used.
Where a shared platform is involved, maintenance and prior defect information may become important evidence.
E-scooter accidents can also result from steering problems, wheel failures, structural defects or other technical malfunctions.
In such cases, determining whether the defect existed before the accident becomes critical.
Technical expert examination may be necessary.
The claimant should avoid assuming that every mechanical failure automatically creates platform liability. The defect, causation and responsible party must be established through evidence.
Not every e-scooter accident is caused by another driver or the scooter itself.
A pothole, dangerous road surface, improperly maintained bicycle lane or construction hazard may cause a rider to fall.
These cases can involve different potential defendants and different liability principles.
Photographs of the exact road condition should be taken immediately because potholes and construction defects may later be repaired.
Location information, camera recordings and witness evidence should also be preserved.
Turkey’s Electric Scooter Regulation contains specific rules concerning e-scooter use.
Among other restrictions, e-scooters may not be ridden on pedestrian walkways. Where a separate bicycle path or bicycle lane exists, they may not instead be ridden on the ordinary vehicle roadway. E-scooters also cannot be used on motorways, intercity highways or roads where the maximum speed limit exceeds 50 km/h. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
The Regulation also prohibits carrying another person and carrying cargo other than personal belongings that can be carried on the rider’s back. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
These rules can become highly relevant when determining fault after an accident.
The February 2026 traffic amendments substantially strengthened penalties for various violations involving bicycles and e-scooters.
According to the official Traffic Directorate, riding an e-scooter on pedestrian areas, using prohibited roads, carrying prohibited passengers or cargo, and violating specified riding rules can result in a TRY 5,000 administrative fine under the amended framework. (Trafik Bakanlığı)
An administrative violation and civil liability are not exactly the same issue, however.
The fact that a rider received a traffic fine can be important evidence, but compensation still requires a separate examination of causation and fault.
The Electric Scooter Regulation prohibits carrying another person on an e-scooter. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
This becomes relevant where two people riding one scooter are injured.
The violation may affect the fault and causation analysis depending on how the accident occurred.
However, it does not necessarily mean that a negligent motor vehicle driver is automatically relieved of all liability.
Each party’s contribution to the accident must be evaluated.
E-scooter use on pedestrian walkways is prohibited under the regulatory framework. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
A rider who strikes a pedestrian while illegally riding on a sidewalk may therefore face a particularly difficult liability position.
Nevertheless, the precise accident circumstances still matter.
The violation is important evidence, but compensation liability should be based on the causal relationship between the conduct and resulting injury.
Partial fault can reduce compensation without necessarily eliminating the claim.
Consider an accident in which a motorist makes an unsafe turn while an e-scooter rider is simultaneously violating a traffic rule.
Both actions may have contributed to the collision.
The official accident report should therefore be reviewed together with camera recordings, road layout and other evidence before the rider accepts a fault percentage.
Camera evidence is often extremely important because e-scooter accidents can happen quickly and leave limited physical evidence.
Nearby businesses, apartment buildings, public facilities and vehicles may have recorded the collision.
Evidence should be requested immediately.
A recording that conclusively establishes fault may be automatically overwritten long before an insurance dispute reaches formal proceedings.
Shared e-scooter applications can create useful digital evidence.
Depending on the platform and available records, information may help establish which scooter was used, when the ride began and ended and the route associated with the journey.
These records can be especially important where there is a dispute concerning the scooter’s identity or the timing of the accident.
Screenshots and electronic records should therefore be preserved as soon as possible.
Where another legally responsible motor vehicle causes the accident, a seriously injured rider may potentially have claims relating to permanent disability, temporary economic loss, reduced earning capacity and other compensable consequences.
The exact scope depends on the applicable liability and insurance rules.
A catastrophic injury claim should distinguish between the victim’s total legally recoverable damages and the amount available under a particular insurance policy.
Permanent disability may become the largest element of an e-scooter accident claim.
A rider thrown onto the road can suffer spinal injuries, brain injuries, severe fractures, nerve damage or permanent orthopedic impairment.
The compensation assessment can depend on the claimant’s age, medical impairment, occupation, income, fault and long-term ability to work.
The medical condition should therefore be evaluated adequately before a serious claim is finalized.
Head trauma is particularly concerning in e-scooter accidents.
Even where there is no obvious catastrophic injury at the scene, neurological symptoms can develop or persist after the accident.
Memory difficulties, concentration problems, dizziness and cognitive impairment can have significant occupational consequences.
Medical follow-up should therefore be preserved carefully where symptoms continue.
A serious fall or collision can produce cervical, thoracic or lumbar spinal injuries.
Catastrophic cases may involve paralysis or substantial permanent mobility limitations.
Such cases require careful evaluation of permanent disability, future earning capacity, rehabilitation and long-term assistance requirements.
The victim should not accept an early settlement before the long-term medical consequences are reasonably understood.
Arm, wrist, shoulder, leg and ankle fractures are common in e-scooter accidents.
Surgery may be required.
Even after treatment, reduced mobility or chronic pain can remain.
A claimant should therefore distinguish temporary injury from permanent impairment when calculating compensation.
An injured rider may be unable to work for weeks or months.
Employment contracts, payroll records, bank statements and employer documentation should be preserved.
Self-employed victims should collect invoices, tax documentation and historical financial records.
The objective is to establish actual economic loss rather than rely on unsupported estimates.
Serious permanent injuries can reduce the victim’s ability to continue working in the previous profession.
This issue becomes especially important for high-income professionals and people whose careers require physical mobility, concentration or fine motor skills.
The same medical impairment can produce dramatically different economic consequences for different professions.
The calculation should therefore be individualized.
Foreign tourists frequently use shared e-scooters while visiting Turkey.
Foreign nationality does not itself eliminate a compensation claim where another legally responsible party causes the accident.
Before returning home, the victim should obtain the accident report, vehicle information, medical records and any available insurance details.
If treatment continues abroad, those records should also be preserved.
A foreign victim may earn income in another country and another currency.
Where loss of earnings or future earning capacity is legally relevant, foreign income should be documented carefully through employment contracts, payslips, tax records and banking documents.
An insurer may challenge a high foreign salary if it is supported only by the claimant’s statement.
Documentary evidence is therefore critical.
If an insured-category motor vehicle causes injury but lacks compulsory motor insurance, alternative compensation mechanisms may become relevant.
The Guarantee Fund should be investigated in qualifying cases.
This is very different from an accident caused exclusively by an e-scooter that is not subject to the same compulsory motor insurance framework.
Correct vehicle classification therefore matters enormously.
An e-scooter rider may be struck by a car whose driver leaves the scene.
The victim should attempt to preserve the registration number, vehicle description, CCTV recordings, dashcam footage and witness information immediately.
Where the responsible motor vehicle cannot ultimately be identified, the availability of alternative statutory compensation mechanisms should be investigated.
This situation generally differs significantly from an ordinary insured motor vehicle collision.
The owner of the damaged vehicle may need to pursue the person responsible under the applicable general liability rules, subject to the particular facts and any available insurance.
If a shared scooter was involved, the rental records may become important in identifying the rider.
A fatal e-scooter accident requires careful identification of the party that caused the death.
If a negligent motor vehicle driver strikes and kills the rider, surviving family members may potentially have loss-of-support and other death-related claims against responsible parties and applicable insurance.
If the accident results from a defective shared scooter, the potential responsibility of the platform or other parties connected with the defect should be investigated.
The compensation strategy therefore depends fundamentally on the cause of death.
The pedestrian may pursue the legally responsible rider for damages.
Where a shared platform is involved, the platform’s potential liability should be investigated separately rather than assumed.
A serious pedestrian injury case should also determine whether any voluntary or contractual insurance coverage applies.
The absence of ordinary compulsory motor insurance does not mean that the injured person has no legal claim. It means that identifying a financially responsible defendant and applicable insurance can be more complicated.
Potentially.
A rider may have personal accident insurance, travel insurance or another policy providing benefits for accidental injuries.
These contractual benefits are separate from a third-party liability claim.
The policy wording should therefore be examined carefully.
Foreign tourists should review travel insurance because some policies may contain exclusions or limitations concerning scooters, motorcycles, risky activities or particular vehicle types.
Caution is appropriate after a serious injury.
Permanent disability may not be clear during the first weeks following the accident.
An early payment may therefore fail to reflect long-term neurological, orthopedic or economic consequences.
Any release should be reviewed carefully before signature, particularly if it purports to settle all present and future claims.
Insurance Arbitration may potentially become relevant where the dispute concerns a qualifying insurance company and covered insurance claim.
However, not every e-scooter accident automatically creates a compulsory motor insurance dispute.
The first step is identifying which insurance policy applies and why the insurer is legally responsible.
Where an insured motor vehicle caused the accident, the ordinary motor insurance framework may become central. Where the scooter rider alone caused the loss, a different legal route may be required.
The central legal question after an e-scooter accident is therefore who actually caused the loss and what liability regime applies to that person or vehicle. A cyclist struck by an insured car, a pedestrian struck by an e-scooter, a rider injured by a defective rental scooter and a rider who crashes because of a dangerous road defect may all have very different compensation routes.
Potentially, yes. Where a motor vehicle driver is legally responsible, the injured rider may have rights against the responsible parties and the vehicle’s applicable compulsory motor insurer.
The ordinary compulsory motor insurance framework applicable to conventional motor vehicles should not automatically be assumed to apply to an e-scooter. The vehicle classification and applicable rules must be examined.
Potentially, yes. The rider may be personally liable under the applicable rules. Any additional responsibility of a shared scooter operator or available insurance must be investigated separately.
Potentially, where there is an independent legal basis for liability, such as a proven defect or maintenance-related problem attributable to the operator. The company is not automatically liable for every accident involving one of its scooters.
No. The Electric Scooter Regulation prohibits carrying another person on an e-scooter. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
No. The regulatory framework prohibits riding e-scooters on pedestrian walkways. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
No. The Regulation prohibits e-scooters on motorways, intercity highways and roads where the maximum speed limit exceeds 50 km/h. (Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı)
Potentially, yes. Foreign nationality does not itself prevent a person from pursuing compensation where another legally responsible party caused the accident.
Potentially, where it is relevant to the legally compensable economic loss. Employment contracts, payslips, tax documents and banking records should be preserved.
Traffic legislation adopted in February 2026 introduced new rules and penalties affecting e-scooters. It also provides that legal liability of electric scooter riders will be governed by general provisions, but the official Traffic Directorate states that this particular liability provision enters into force on January 1, 2027. (Trafik Bakanlığı)
E-scooter accidents require particularly careful legal classification because there may not be an ordinary compulsory motor insurance policy behind the scooter in the same way there normally is behind a car. The first task is therefore to identify exactly how the accident happened and which person, motor vehicle, business or other entity may be legally responsible.
Where an e-scooter rider is struck by a car, taxi, bus, motorcycle or commercial vehicle, the responsible motor vehicle’s compulsory insurance can become a central part of the compensation claim. Where a pedestrian is injured by an e-scooter, or where a rider is injured because of an alleged defect in a shared scooter, the liability analysis can be significantly different.
The issue is particularly important during 2026 because Turkey has adopted new traffic legislation affecting e-scooters, while the provision expressly subjecting e-scooter riders’ legal liability to general rules is scheduled to enter into force on January 1, 2027. (Trafik Bakanlığı) Claims should therefore always be evaluated according to the law applicable on the actual accident date.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign individuals and international clients with e-scooter accident compensation, shared scooter accidents, pedestrian injury claims, permanent disability compensation, foreign income claims, defective scooter disputes, accidents involving cars and commercial vehicles, insurance coverage disputes and traffic accident litigation in Turkey.
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