

Can future medical expenses be claimed after an accident in Turkey? Learn how future surgery, rehabilitation, prosthetic devices, long-term treatment and care costs may affect serious injury compensation and insurance claims.
A serious accident can create medical expenses long after the injured person leaves the hospital. Further surgery may be required months later, rehabilitation may continue for years, a prosthetic device may need replacement, spinal or neurological injuries may require long-term treatment, and a permanently disabled person may need continuing medical assistance. This creates an important question in serious accident cases: can expenses that have not yet been incurred be included when compensation is claimed?
Under Turkish law, future consequences of bodily injury can potentially be relevant to the overall compensation assessment where they are sufficiently connected to the accident and capable of being established with appropriate evidence. Article 54 of the Turkish Code of Obligations identifies treatment expenses, loss of earnings, losses arising from reduction or loss of working capacity and losses arising from impairment of the injured person’s economic future among the principal categories of bodily injury damages. The broader statutory framework also expressly recognizes situations in which the consequences of bodily injury cannot yet be determined with sufficient certainty at the time of judgment.
The important distinction is between a reasonably foreseeable future medical need supported by evidence and a purely hypothetical expense. A claimant cannot simply estimate that medical treatment might be necessary at some point in the future and demand an arbitrary amount. The stronger approach is to establish what treatment is expected, why it is medically necessary, when it is likely to occur and what reasonable financial consequences it may create.
Future medical expenses are accident-related healthcare costs that are reasonably expected to arise after the compensation claim is prepared or resolved. They differ from medical bills that have already been paid or incurred.
For example, a claimant who suffers a complicated orthopedic injury may have completed the first operation but still require another surgical procedure. A spinal cord injury victim may require continuing rehabilitation and medical equipment. A person who loses a limb may require prosthetic treatment and future replacement devices. A traumatic brain injury victim may require neurological follow-up and long-term rehabilitation.
In each case, the future need arises from an injury that already exists even though the corresponding expense has not yet been incurred.
Potentially, yes, but the legal and insurance analysis must be performed carefully.
Article 54 of the Turkish Code of Obligations expressly includes treatment expenses within bodily injury damages. It also recognizes lost earnings, reduced or lost working capacity and impairment of economic future.
Article 75 is particularly important in cases involving uncertain future consequences. Where the consequences of bodily injury cannot be determined with sufficient certainty when the decision is made, the judge may reserve the right to reconsider the compensation determination within two years after the decision becomes final.
This demonstrates an important principle in serious injury litigation: compensation law recognizes that the medical consequences of bodily injury are not always fully known immediately after an accident.
However, the question of whether a particular expense is recoverable from a compulsory motor insurer, another insurer, the responsible person or another institution must be analyzed separately according to the applicable insurance and liability framework.
The distinction between foreseeable and speculative treatment is crucial.
Suppose an orthopedic specialist states that the injured person is likely to require another operation because of the permanent consequences of the accident. That creates a substantially stronger evidentiary basis than a claimant simply stating that another operation might someday be necessary.
Similarly, a spinal injury victim with a documented long-term rehabilitation program has a stronger basis for establishing continuing medical needs than someone presenting an unsupported estimate of lifetime treatment expenses.
The claim should therefore be based on medical probability and evidence rather than possibility alone.
Additional surgery is common after severe traffic accidents.
A victim may require initial emergency surgery followed by reconstructive procedures, orthopedic operations or other interventions after the condition has stabilized.
The medical report should explain why future surgery is necessary and how it relates to the original accident.
Where possible, the anticipated treatment should also be described with sufficient detail to allow its financial consequences to be evaluated.
The closer the connection between the medical recommendation and the accident injury, the stronger the evidentiary basis for considering future costs.
Rehabilitation can continue long after hospitalization ends.
Victims with spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, severe fractures or amputations may require physiotherapy, occupational therapy or other rehabilitation services for extended periods.
The duration and frequency of treatment matter.
A vague recommendation stating that the patient “may benefit from physiotherapy” is different from a structured rehabilitation plan recommending treatment several times per week over a defined period.
Medical evidence should therefore establish the nature and anticipated duration of the rehabilitation.
Amputation cases illustrate particularly clearly why future medical costs can be important.
A prosthetic limb is not necessarily a one-time lifetime purchase. Depending on the patient’s age, medical circumstances, type of device and ordinary wear, replacement or adjustment may become necessary.
A young accident victim may potentially require several prosthetic devices during their lifetime.
The claim should therefore consider medically and technically established future prosthetic requirements rather than focusing exclusively on the first prosthesis obtained after the accident.
Evidence may include specialist recommendations, prosthetic assessments, invoices and technical information concerning expected replacement periods.
Spinal cord injuries can create substantial continuing medical needs.
A victim may require neurological treatment, physiotherapy, rehabilitation, mobility equipment and continuing specialist supervision.
Catastrophic cases can also involve secondary medical complications.
The future treatment analysis should therefore examine the victim’s complete prognosis rather than merely repeating the expenses incurred during the first hospitalization.
Brain injury cases can involve long-term neurological and cognitive rehabilitation.
A claimant may physically appear to have recovered while continuing to experience memory problems, concentration difficulties, speech impairment or behavioral consequences.
Neurological follow-up and rehabilitation may therefore continue long after visible physical injuries have healed.
Future treatment should be supported by specialist medical evidence connecting the continuing need to the original traumatic brain injury.
Serious fractures may require more than one operation.
Metal implants may require later intervention. Joint damage may produce continuing rehabilitation requirements. Complications can necessitate additional procedures.
The possibility of future orthopedic treatment should therefore be investigated before a serious injury claim is finally settled.
A claimant who signs a comprehensive settlement immediately after the first surgery may later discover that the actual medical consequences were considerably greater than expected.
Some accident injuries require continuing medication.
Where the medication is medically necessary because of accident-related injuries and is expected to continue for a significant period, future medication needs may become relevant to the overall medical assessment.
Again, the evidence should identify the medication, reason for its use and anticipated duration.
An unsupported assumption of lifelong medication is unlikely to carry the same evidentiary weight as a specialist’s documented treatment plan.
Permanent disability can require wheelchairs, mobility aids, orthopedic devices or other medically necessary equipment.
Certain devices may require periodic replacement.
The claim should therefore distinguish between the initial acquisition cost and reasonably foreseeable future needs.
Medical necessity, expected useful life and reasonable replacement requirements should be documented.
Certain serious injuries require continuing monitoring even after active treatment decreases.
Neurological, orthopedic or other specialist examinations may remain necessary.
Whether these future costs should form part of the compensation analysis depends on the medical evidence and applicable legal framework.
Routine healthcare unrelated to the accident should obviously be distinguished from monitoring required specifically because of accident-related injuries.
A serious accident may also create psychological consequences requiring professional treatment.
Where such treatment is medically connected to the accident, the same basic evidentiary principles apply.
The claimant should establish diagnosis, treatment need, duration and causal connection rather than simply asserting that emotional difficulties exist.
The insurance coverage position should then be evaluated separately according to the particular policy and compensation route.
Caregiver expenses require separate consideration from ordinary hospital treatment.
A catastrophic injury may leave the claimant unable to perform daily activities independently.
The need may be temporary or permanent.
Medical evidence should establish whether assistance is required, what level of assistance is necessary and for how long.
The amount and payment route can depend on the applicable liability and insurance framework, so caregiver claims should not automatically be treated as identical to ordinary hospital invoices.
Some severely disabled accident victims may eventually leave hospital but continue to require substantial assistance at home.
This can create significant long-term financial consequences.
A strong claim should establish the victim’s functional limitations and actual care needs.
Where lifetime assistance is alleged, the medical basis for that conclusion should be particularly clear because the resulting financial calculation can be substantial.
A permanently disabled claimant may require changes to living arrangements.
Wheelchair accessibility, bathroom adaptations or other modifications may become necessary depending on the nature of the disability.
These expenses are not automatically recoverable merely because the claimant suffered a serious accident.
Necessity, reasonableness, causation and the applicable legal basis should be established.
Technical evidence may therefore be required in addition to medical evidence.
A person who loses mobility may require modifications to a vehicle or specialized transportation arrangements.
As with home adaptations, the claimant should establish why the modification is medically necessary and how it relates to the accident-related disability.
Actual quotations, invoices and technical assessments may help demonstrate the financial consequences.
There is no universal formula applicable to every future medical expense.
The calculation generally begins with medical evidence establishing what future treatment is reasonably expected.
The anticipated frequency and duration should then be identified.
Current reasonable treatment costs may provide a starting point for financial assessment, while long-term calculations may require consideration of the period during which the expense is expected to continue.
In complex catastrophic injury cases, medical and financial expertise may therefore need to work together.
The calculation should remain evidence-based rather than simply multiplying an estimated annual cost by an assumed number of years.
Some future expenses may continue for many years.
For a young person who suffers permanent paralysis, the duration of rehabilitation, medical equipment or care needs may extend far into the future.
The expected duration of the medically necessary expense therefore becomes important.
However, long-term calculations must also comply with the legally applicable compensation methodology rather than relying on a simplistic lifetime multiplication.
Medical costs can change substantially over time.
This creates difficulty when estimating expenses that may arise many years later.
The claimant should avoid inventing an arbitrary inflation assumption.
Where a long-term financial calculation is necessary, the methodology should comply with the applicable compensation rules and be supported appropriately.
Future medical expenses are fundamentally medical before they become financial.
An accountant cannot reliably determine whether the claimant will require another operation.
An actuarial calculation cannot establish whether physiotherapy will be necessary for five years.
The medical foundation therefore comes first.
The medical evidence should identify the injury, prognosis, anticipated treatment and expected duration.
Financial valuation follows from those medical conclusions.
A serious future-medical-expense claim should preserve the complete hospital file, diagnostic imaging, operative reports, rehabilitation records, prescriptions, specialist reports, disability assessments, invoices and future treatment recommendations.
Where prosthetic or medical equipment is involved, quotations and technical specifications may also become important.
Foreign claimants receiving continuing treatment outside Turkey should preserve the equivalent documentation from their home country.
A foreign tourist or resident injured in Turkey may receive emergency treatment locally before returning home.
Future medical expenses may therefore arise entirely outside Turkey.
This does not mean that those expenses should automatically be ignored.
The important issues include causal connection, medical necessity, reasonableness, proof and the applicable legal and insurance framework.
Medical records should clearly connect continuing treatment abroad to the injuries sustained in the Turkish accident.
Potentially, depending on the circumstances.
A foreign claimant should document why the treatment is required, what treatment is being received and its cost.
The fact that treatment takes place outside Turkey can create additional disputes concerning reasonableness and valuation.
Detailed medical documentation and actual invoices or reliable treatment estimates become particularly important.
For vehicles used to transport people, the official 2026 compulsory motor insurance limits are TRY 3.6 million per person and TRY 18 million per accident for healthcare expenses, and TRY 3.6 million per person and TRY 18 million per accident for disability and death.
These are maximum insurance coverage limits rather than automatic compensation amounts.
The applicable payment route for a particular medical expense must still be identified.
Not necessarily.
This is an important distinction.
Traffic accident healthcare expenses operate within a specific statutory insurance and healthcare framework. The responsible driver’s compulsory motor insurer should therefore not automatically be treated as directly responsible for every invoice simply because the treatment resulted from a traffic accident.
The nature of the expense, statutory healthcare rules, insurance coverage and potential liability of other responsible parties should be analyzed separately.
A catastrophic injury can generate losses exceeding available compulsory insurance protection.
In that situation, the overall legal liability of the responsible driver, vehicle operator and other potentially responsible parties may need to be investigated.
Additional insurance policies may also be relevant.
The claimant should therefore distinguish between the total legally recoverable loss and the maximum amount payable under a particular insurance policy.
Not necessarily.
A claimant should not delay necessary legal action merely because treatment continues.
However, final settlement of the entire claim requires caution where the medical consequences remain uncertain.
Article 75 of the Turkish Code of Obligations specifically recognizes situations in which bodily injury consequences cannot yet be determined with sufficient certainty.
The appropriate strategy depends on the medical prognosis, limitation periods, insurance process and nature of the damages.
Early settlement is particularly dangerous where future medical treatment is likely.
An insurer may make an offer after the first surgery while rehabilitation is still continuing.
If the claimant signs a broad final release and later requires additional treatment, the legal consequences of that settlement can become extremely important.
Before accepting a final payment, the claimant should understand what rights are being released and whether the medical prognosis is sufficiently clear.
Where a qualifying insurance claim is rejected, underpaid or otherwise disputed, Insurance Arbitration may provide an alternative dispute-resolution route.
However, future medical expense claims require careful evidentiary preparation.
The claimant should not simply present a projected number.
The underlying medical need and the legal responsibility for that expense must first be established.
Turkey’s motor insurance framework continued to change during 2026. SEDDK issued amendments concerning compulsory motor insurance General Conditions and introduced additional claim-notification measures during the year, including the common motor vehicle claim notification framework.
Claims arising from 2026 accidents should therefore be evaluated according to the rules applicable to the relevant accident, treatment and application dates.
The central question is not simply whether an expense has already been paid. The more important question is whether future treatment is a medically established and legally compensable consequence of the accident.
Potentially, yes. Treatment expenses are expressly recognized as bodily injury damages, while future consequences must be supported by appropriate evidence and evaluated under the applicable liability and insurance framework.
Potentially, where medical evidence establishes that further surgery is reasonably expected because of the accident-related injury.
Potentially. The need, frequency and anticipated duration of rehabilitation should be medically documented.
Potentially. Where future prosthetic replacement is medically and technically foreseeable, those requirements should be documented as part of the claimant’s long-term medical needs.
Potentially, depending on the victim’s medical condition, need for assistance and applicable legal and insurance rules. The care requirement should be supported medically.
Potentially. The claimant should establish that treatment abroad is connected to the accident and document its medical necessity and cost.
For motor vehicles used to transport people, the official compulsory insurance healthcare limit is TRY 3.6 million per person and TRY 18 million per accident.
No. Medical necessity, causation, coverage and the correct payment mechanism must be established.
Particular caution is appropriate. Turkish law itself recognizes situations where the consequences of bodily injury cannot yet be determined with sufficient certainty.
The medical and legal basis of the rejection should be examined. Depending on the claim, further insurance proceedings, Insurance Arbitration or litigation may need to be considered.
Future medical expenses can become one of the most important components of a catastrophic accident claim. A spinal cord injury victim may require years of rehabilitation, an amputee may need continuing prosthetic treatment, and a traumatic brain injury victim may require long-term neurological care. Evaluating only the expenses incurred during the first hospital admission can therefore significantly understate the real consequences of the accident.
The strongest claims begin with medical evidence. Future surgery, rehabilitation, medical equipment, prosthetic requirements and care needs should be documented by appropriate specialists before their financial value is calculated. Foreign victims should also preserve medical records and invoices from continuing treatment received after returning home.
A serious accident claim should also distinguish between total legal damages and the limits or scope of a particular insurance policy. Where catastrophic future losses potentially exceed available insurance protection, the liability of other responsible parties and any additional insurance coverage should be investigated.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign accident victims and international clients with future medical expense claims, permanent disability compensation, spinal cord injuries, traumatic brain injuries, amputation claims, rehabilitation expenses, caregiver claims, loss of earning capacity, disputed insurance compensation, Insurance Arbitration and serious 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