

Learn how to file an Insurance Arbitration Commission claim in Turkey in 2026, what evidence is required, how compensation is calculated, how expert reports work and how rejected or underpaid insurance claims can be recovered.
The Insurance Arbitration Commission is one of the most important legal mechanisms available to policyholders, insured persons and other beneficiaries seeking unpaid or underpaid insurance compensation in Turkey. Instead of immediately filing a conventional lawsuit against an insurance company, an eligible claimant may bring the dispute before specialized insurance arbitrators under Article 30 of Insurance Law No. 5684. The procedure can be used in many disputes involving rejected claims, partial payments, vehicle damage, total-loss valuations, vehicle diminution in value, bodily injury, property damage, fire losses, commercial insurance and other insured losses. The Commission confirms that applications are generally decided on the documents contained in the file and that hearings are held only where the arbitrator considers them necessary. This makes the quality of the initial application and supporting evidence particularly important. (Sigorta Tahkim)
The Insurance Arbitration Commission provides a specialized alternative dispute-resolution mechanism for disputes arising from insurance relationships. Its purpose is to resolve qualifying disputes between participating insurance organizations and policyholders or persons benefiting from insurance contracts through independent insurance arbitrators. The system should not be confused with ordinary private contractual arbitration. It is a statutory insurance-specific mechanism established under Turkish insurance legislation. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Insurance arbitration can potentially cover disputes where an insurer completely rejects compensation, pays less than the amount legally due, refuses certain repair expenses, applies disputed depreciation, calculates an incorrect vehicle market value, rejects part of a fire or property claim or otherwise disputes its obligation under the insurance relationship. Depending on the applicable insurance and jurisdictional requirements, disputes may involve comprehensive motor insurance, compulsory motor liability insurance, property insurance, fire insurance, machinery insurance, bodily injury and other insured losses.
The system is not limited to the person whose name appears as the policyholder. Depending on the insurance relationship, a policyholder, insured person or another person deriving a legally recognized benefit from the insurance contract may potentially apply. Legal entities can also bring eligible claims. Therefore, both an individual vehicle owner and a company pursuing a substantial insured commercial loss may potentially use insurance arbitration.
Yes. Foreign nationality does not itself prevent a person from pursuing an eligible insurance claim in Turkey. However, the Commission currently states that online applications require identity verification through e-Devlet. Because of this requirement, foreign nationals currently make their applications physically rather than through the online application system. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Potentially, yes. Foreign companies may have insured assets, cargo, vehicles or other commercial interests in Turkey. Corporate authorization documents, the insurance policy and documents demonstrating entitlement to compensation should be prepared carefully. Where representation is through an attorney, the power of attorney requirements applicable to Commission proceedings must also be satisfied.
Yes. This is one of the most important procedural requirements. Before applying to the Commission, the claimant must first submit the relevant demand to the insurance company. The Commission currently explains that where the insurer issues a final response but does not satisfy the claim, or where the applicable waiting period expires without a final response, an application may then be made to the Commission. Its current FAQ identifies a 15-day period for traffic insurance and 15 business days for other branches in the circumstances described there. (Sigorta Tahkim)
The preliminary claim defines the dispute. Suppose the policyholder believes TRY 2,500,000 is payable and submits the supporting evidence to the insurer. The insurer accepts only TRY 1,600,000. The remaining TRY 900,000 can then be clearly identified as the disputed amount. By contrast, if the original application merely asks the insurer to “reconsider the file” without specifying the loss or providing supporting evidence, procedural and evidentiary disputes may arise later. The initial demand should therefore explain what happened, which policy is involved, what compensation is requested and why the insurer is responsible.
A complete rejection does not automatically determine the claimant’s legal rights. The rejection should first be analyzed to determine the insurer’s actual defence. The insurer may argue that the event falls outside policy coverage, that an exclusion applies, that the damage pre-existed the insured event or that the policyholder breached a contractual obligation. The arbitration application should address the specific rejection ground rather than simply state that the insurer’s decision is unfair.
An underpayment can potentially form the basis of an arbitration claim. Suppose the covered loss is TRY 3,200,000 and the insurer pays TRY 2,000,000. The claimant may potentially pursue the outstanding TRY 1,200,000. The application should explain exactly how that difference arises. If TRY 500,000 relates to excluded machinery, TRY 400,000 to disputed depreciation and TRY 300,000 to repair costs, those components should be separately identified and supported.
Not necessarily. Receiving an undisputed amount should be distinguished from legally settling the entire claim. However, if the claimant signed a release, discharge, waiver or “full and final settlement” document when receiving payment, that document must be examined carefully. The insurer may argue that the claimant waived all remaining rights. Whether that argument succeeds depends on the wording, circumstances and applicable legal rules.
The Commission currently requires the prescribed application documentation, including the application form for physical applications, identification documents and proof concerning payment of the required application costs. The claimant should also provide the insurer’s final response or evidence establishing that the applicable response period expired without the claim being resolved, together with all documents capable of proving the substantive claim. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Insurance arbitration is predominantly file-based. The Commission expressly emphasizes the importance of submitting all documents supporting the claimant’s position because applications are generally determined from the case file. (Sigorta Tahkim) A claimant should therefore approach the application as an evidentiary file rather than a simple complaint form. The arbitrator needs evidence establishing the insurance relationship, insured event, coverage, damage, amount of compensation and insurer’s failure to pay the correct amount.
The policy should normally be examined together with endorsements, special conditions, applicable general conditions, coverage limits, deductibles and exclusions. A claimant cannot establish entitlement merely by proving economic damage. The damage must also fall within the insured coverage. For example, a factory may suffer TRY 20 million of financial loss, but the arbitration analysis must determine which components are covered by the relevant property, machinery or business-interruption provisions.
The rejection letter can reveal exactly which issue must be proved. If the insurer rejects the claim because the event allegedly falls within an exclusion, the arbitration application should focus on why that exclusion does not apply. If the insurer accepts coverage but disputes the amount, evidence should focus on valuation. Understanding the insurer’s defence allows the claimant to avoid wasting substantial argument on issues that are not actually disputed.
Many insurance disputes cannot be resolved through legal documents alone. Vehicle valuation may require automotive expertise. Fire damage can require engineering analysis. Machinery claims may require mechanical or electrical specialists. Bodily injury claims can require medical and actuarial assessment. A claimant who disputes the insurer’s expert report should identify specific methodological errors and support the alternative valuation with objective evidence.
Yes. The fact that the insurance company obtained an expert report does not necessarily make its valuation legally conclusive. Suppose an insurer’s expert values a total-loss vehicle at TRY 1,500,000, but reliable comparable vehicles demonstrate a pre-loss market value of approximately TRY 1,900,000. The claimant can challenge the TRY 400,000 difference by demonstrating why the insurer’s comparables or methodology were inappropriate.
Vehicle disputes can require accident reports, photographs, repair quotations, service invoices, previous maintenance records, market-value evidence and technical reports. In total-loss cases, comparable vehicles should genuinely reflect the model year, mileage, trim, engine, equipment and condition of the insured vehicle. Simply submitting advertisements for superficially similar but substantially different vehicles may not provide persuasive valuation evidence.
Property claims may require photographs and videos taken immediately after the event, engineering reports, contractor quotations, invoices, architectural documents, inventory records, purchase invoices and evidence concerning replacement costs. Where the insurer alleges pre-existing deterioration, maintenance records and pre-loss photographs can become particularly important.
Commercial losses frequently require a combination of technical and financial evidence. A factory fire, for example, may involve structural damage, machinery, inventory, cleanup costs and interruption of operations. Technical experts can establish the physical loss while accountants or financial experts determine business-interruption losses. The arbitration claim should distinguish these categories clearly.
Bodily injury disputes can require hospital documentation, medical reports, disability assessments, income evidence and actuarial calculations. The precise nature of the evidence depends on the claim. In substantial injury cases, small differences in disability percentage, income assumptions or calculation periods can materially alter the compensation.
The Commission provides mechanisms for sending additional documents associated with an existing application. Its current guidance states that documents omitted from the original application can be submitted through the relevant online document-submission mechanism using the application number; it also warns that documents sent simply by email for inclusion in the application are not accepted. (Sigorta Tahkim) Nevertheless, claimants should avoid relying on later supplementation. A complete initial file is generally preferable.
A hearing is not automatic. The Commission explains that applications are principally examined on the file and a hearing is held where the arbitrator considers it necessary. (Sigorta Tahkim) Consequently, the claimant should not assume that unclear calculations or missing explanations can simply be corrected orally later.
The amount requested should be transparent. Assume the policyholder establishes a covered loss of TRY 5,000,000 and the insurer has already paid TRY 3,200,000. The principal outstanding claim is TRY 1,800,000. If the claimant also seeks applicable interest or other recoverable amounts, those claims should be identified according to their legal basis. A clear calculation enables the arbitrator to understand precisely what monetary award is being requested.
Potentially, yes. Insurance compensation claims can involve default interest once the insurer’s payment obligation becomes due under the applicable legal framework. Therefore, the economic value of the arbitration case may extend beyond the unpaid principal compensation. The relevant maturity date, insurer application and applicable interest rules should be examined carefully.
Yes, where the claimant establishes that the repair expenses arise from a covered insured event and are payable under the policy. Disputes commonly concern whether particular components should be repaired or replaced, whether labour rates are reasonable or whether certain damage pre-existed the accident. Repair quotations, invoices and technical evidence can therefore be critical.
Potentially. If an insurer uses an incorrect pre-loss market value, the claimant can challenge the valuation. The arbitration claim should explain why the correct market value is higher and provide appropriate evidence. If the insurer paid TRY 1.4 million but the properly established value is TRY 1.75 million, the disputed additional compensation may be TRY 350,000.
Yes, depending on coverage. Property insurance arbitration can concern building repairs, contents, machinery, inventory and other insured losses. The claimant should separate each category rather than present one unsupported total figure. This becomes especially important in high-value commercial cases.
Where the applicable policy provides business-interruption coverage, disputes may arise concerning lost turnover, gross profit, indemnity periods, saved expenses and reasonable restoration periods. Accounting evidence can therefore be as important as engineering evidence. The claimant should demonstrate how the insured physical event caused the claimed financial interruption.
Yes. Filing a claim for a particular amount does not guarantee that the full amount will be awarded. The arbitrator evaluates the legal entitlement and evidence. If only part of the loss is proven, only that portion may be awarded. This is another reason why inflated or poorly documented claims can be counterproductive.
The Commission allows qualifying applicants to use its online application system, while physical filing remains relevant in specified circumstances. Electronic applications automatically generate the required application form from the information entered into the system. Physical applications require the prescribed signed form. (Sigorta Tahkim) Foreign nationals are currently limited to physical filing because online applications rely on e-Devlet identity verification. (Sigorta Tahkim)
The Commission currently states that a power of attorney used for an application made through legal counsel must contain special authority for alternative dispute resolution or specifically for an application to the Insurance Arbitration Commission, in accordance with Article 74 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Sigorta Tahkim) This requirement should be checked before filing to avoid unnecessary procedural problems.
The Commission’s currently published tariff lists TRY 600 for disputes up to TRY 8,500, TRY 1,200 for disputes from TRY 8,501 to TRY 17,000, TRY 1,750 for disputes from TRY 17,001 to TRY 85,000, and 1.8% of the disputed amount for claims exceeding TRY 85,000, subject to the stated TRY 1,750 minimum. (Sigorta Tahkim) These figures reflect the Commission’s current published tariff and should be checked on the actual filing date because fees can be updated.
Yes. For applications in 2026, the Commission currently states that the notification expense is TRY 75 where the applicant provides a valid KEP address and TRY 325 where no valid KEP address is provided. (Sigorta Tahkim) These amounts are separate from the substantive compensation claimed.
Yes. This is important when relying on older 2026 information. The Commission’s announcements show that a further application-fee tariff change was announced on 13 July 2026, which explains why an older January 2026 announcement may contain lower amounts than those appearing on the Commission’s current fee page. (Sigorta Tahkim) Applicants should therefore rely on the tariff effective on the actual filing date.
The application first undergoes preliminary examination by Commission rapporteurs. According to the Commission’s current guidance, this stage must generally be completed within 15 days. If the application satisfies the necessary conditions and requires determination on the merits, the file is transferred to an independent insurance arbitrator or arbitration panel. (Sigorta Tahkim)
The arbitrator or arbitration panel generally has a maximum of four months to issue the final decision after referral. The period can be extended with the parties’ express written consent. (Sigorta Tahkim) This defined timetable is one of the procedural features that can make insurance arbitration attractive compared with prolonged conventional litigation.
Generally, claimants should choose their procedural route carefully. The Commission expressly states that disputes already brought before a court, arbitration under the Code of Civil Procedure or a Consumer Arbitration Committee are not accepted for Commission determination. (Sigorta Tahkim) Parallel proceedings concerning the same dispute should therefore not be initiated casually.
Finality depends principally on the amount in dispute and applicable statutory rules. Under the Commission’s current 2026 guidance, awards concerning disputes below TRY 35,000 are final under the ordinary monetary-threshold framework, while disputes of TRY 35,000 and above can be challenged once through the Commission’s objection mechanism. (Sigorta Tahkim)
The current Commission guidance identifies TRY 35,000 as the relevant threshold for the ordinary objection mechanism. A qualifying party can challenge the arbitrator’s decision once before the Commission. (Sigorta Tahkim) Because monetary thresholds are updated periodically, the applicable threshold should be determined according to the rules relevant to the filing date.
The Commission’s current guidance states that where the disputed amount exceeds TRY 383,000, a decision rendered following the Commission’s objection process can be taken to the Court of Cassation under the applicable rules. (Sigorta Tahkim)
This is particularly important in 2026. The Commission currently explains that whether an arbitration award is subject to objection or further appeal is determined according to the monetary thresholds applicable on the date the arbitration application was filed. (Sigorta Tahkim) Claimants should therefore preserve the filing date and apply the threshold corresponding to that date rather than automatically using the figure existing when the final decision arrives.
Where an objection satisfies the procedural requirements, the dispute is assigned to a three-member Objection Arbitration Panel. The Commission states that the panel determines the objection within the statutory two-month period. (Sigorta Tahkim) The objection should identify specific legal, evidentiary, calculation or expert errors in the original award rather than simply repeat the initial application.
A timely and procedurally valid objection prevents the arbitration award from becoming final and suspends enforcement under the statutory framework described by the Commission. (Sigorta Tahkim) This can be important for both policyholders and insurers when substantial compensation awards are involved.
Once the award has the necessary enforceability and any applicable objection or appeal issues have been resolved, enforcement-law mechanisms can become relevant where the insurer does not voluntarily satisfy the award. The claimant’s objective is therefore not simply to obtain a favorable expert opinion but ultimately to establish an enforceable monetary entitlement.
A foreign vehicle owner suffers a serious accident in Turkey. The insurer declares the vehicle a total loss and pays TRY 1,450,000. Reliable market evidence demonstrates that the vehicle was worth approximately TRY 1,800,000 immediately before the accident. After completing the required prior insurer application, the claimant may potentially pursue the TRY 350,000 difference before the Commission. The evidence should demonstrate why the insurer’s market comparables were unsuitable.
A factory suffers a covered fire resulting in TRY 15 million of damage. The insurer pays TRY 9 million and rejects TRY 6 million concerning machinery and electrical systems. The company obtains engineering evidence demonstrating that the disputed damage resulted directly from the fire. The arbitration application can then identify the TRY 6 million outstanding amount and explain the technical basis for each disputed component.
An insured vehicle requires TRY 700,000 of repairs. The insurer approves only TRY 420,000 because its expert argues that several components can be repaired instead of replaced. Technical evidence from the manufacturer establishes that replacement is necessary. The arbitration claim may therefore concern the remaining TRY 280,000 together with applicable ancillary claims.
A foreign owner has an insured apartment in Turkey that suffers substantial water damage. The insurer rejects most of the claim by alleging gradual leakage. A plumbing expert establishes that a sudden pipe rupture caused the damage. Because foreign nationals currently cannot use the Commission’s e-Devlet-based online filing system, the claimant would need to follow the applicable physical application procedure. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Common problems include failing to apply to the insurer first, inadequately identifying the amount claimed, submitting an incomplete policy, omitting the insurer’s rejection, failing to explain the compensation calculation and relying on unsupported statements instead of technical evidence. Another serious mistake is ignoring previously signed settlement or release documents. A strong application should anticipate the insurer’s principal defences before the file reaches the arbitrator.
A successful application should answer five fundamental questions: What insurance policy applies? What insured event occurred? Why does the policy cover the loss? How much compensation is legally payable? How much remains unpaid? Every important answer should be supported by documentation. Where technical issues are disputed, expert evidence should explain causation and valuation. Where financial loss is claimed, calculations should be transparent and supported by records.
Insurance arbitration procedure has seen several developments during 2026. The Commission’s current announcements include updates concerning monetary thresholds, payment procedures, expert lists, application fees and, in August 2026, further implementation decisions concerning dispute and objection applications as well as motor vehicle insurance applications. (Sigorta Tahkim) This means claimants should avoid relying on application guides prepared several years ago—or even early-2026 fee information—without checking whether procedural requirements have since changed.
The strongest approach is generally to treat the arbitration application as a complete compensation case from the beginning. First, identify the correct insurer and policy. Second, submit a properly documented demand to the insurance company. Third, determine precisely why the claim was rejected or underpaid. Fourth, calculate the outstanding compensation. Fifth, obtain technical, medical, actuarial or financial evidence where necessary. Sixth, file the Commission application with the required documentation and applicable fees. Finally, monitor every notification because expert procedures, additional-document requests, arbitration decisions and objection rights can all involve important procedural consequences. Insurance arbitration should not be approached merely as an administrative complaint against an insurer. It is a legal adjudication mechanism capable of determining whether substantial insurance compensation is payable.
Yes. A prior application to the relevant insurance company is required before the Commission application. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Potentially, yes. The unpaid difference can form the subject of the arbitration claim if the claimant can establish that additional compensation is legally payable.
The policy, insurer application and response, payment documents, expert reports, photographs, invoices, repair quotations and other documents proving coverage and loss should be submitted as applicable. Because proceedings are generally file-based, evidence is particularly important. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Yes. The claimant may present contrary technical or valuation evidence demonstrating why the insurer’s assessment is incorrect.
The preliminary examination is generally completed within 15 days. After referral, the arbitrator or panel generally has four months to issue the final decision unless the parties expressly agree in writing to extend that period. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Under the Commission’s current system, no. Because online filing uses e-Devlet identity verification, foreign nationals currently make physical applications. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Potentially, yes. Depending on maturity and default rules applicable to the insurance claim, interest may be sought in addition to unpaid principal compensation.
Under the current 2026 monetary framework, disputes of TRY 35,000 and above may qualify for the Commission’s objection procedure. (Sigorta Tahkim)
Under the current 2026 framework, objection decisions concerning disputes exceeding TRY 383,000 may qualify for appeal to the Court of Cassation. (Sigorta Tahkim)
The Commission states that disputes already brought before a court, Consumer Arbitration Committee or arbitration under the Code of Civil Procedure are not accepted for Commission determination. (Sigorta Tahkim)
A successful Insurance Arbitration Commission claim requires more than demonstrating that an insurer refused payment. The claimant should establish policy coverage, the insured event, causation, actual financial loss, incorrect insurer deductions and the exact outstanding compensation.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to Turkish and foreign policyholders concerning rejected and underpaid insurance claims, Insurance Arbitration Commission proceedings, disputed expert reports, motor insurance, property and fire insurance, commercial losses and other insurance compensation disputes.
Fırat Fesih Kaya can assess the insurance policy and claim file, calculate the outstanding compensation, prepare the arbitration application, challenge incorrect expert valuations and pursue compensation, applicable interest and related claims through the appropriate insurance dispute procedure.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile Phone: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yildirim Tower, Balgat, Cankaya / Ankara, Turkey