Motor Insurance Claim Rejected in Turkey: Foreign Driver, ALO193, Insurer Application, Arbitration and Court

1. Obtain the written rejection or calculation

An oral statement that “insurance will not pay” is not enough for legal analysis.

Request the decision showing the policy clause/statutory reason and the amount accepted or rejected.

Keep claim reference and date.

2. ALO193 is an operational claim channel, not an adjudicator

Under SEDDK Circular 2026/22, Article 4(2), a valid OHİM application counts as received by the relevant insurer, Guarantee Fund or Motor Insurers’ Bureau when it reaches SBM’s database. Technical transmission delays cannot count against the applicant. Keep the reference and receipt record. This additional claims channel took effect on 1 September 2026. [1]

This receipt rule does not establish coverage, prove the amount payable or remove the need for supporting documents. OHİM does not decide the merits of an insurance dispute. SBM lists passport or temporary identity numbers for foreign applicants. [2]

3. Coverage disputes begin with the exact policy

Compulsory traffic insurance and kasko are different contracts/regimes.

Traffic insurance principally protects third parties; kasko protects the insured vehicle within chosen cover.

Do not rely on the product’s marketing name; obtain policy schedule and general/special conditions.

A third-party claim, insurer recourse and an own-damage claim must be analysed separately. Road Traffic Act Article 95 protects an injured third party against contractual grounds that remove or reduce the insurer’s obligation to its policyholder; the insurer may instead have a separate right of recovery against the insured. Traffic General Conditions B.4 address that recourse. This does not remove statutory coverage exclusions, policy limits or the need to establish liability and loss. Kasko concerns damage to the insured vehicle under its own coverage rules. [3]

4. Unauthorised driver allegations require factual proof

Check the actual driver, licence class, expiry or suspension, nationality, entry records and rules in force on the accident date. A foreign licence is not invalid merely because it was issued abroad. Under Road Traffic Regulation Article 88, subject to applicable legislation and treaties, foreign nationals may generally drive on a foreign licence for up to six months from entry into Türkiye. Turkish citizens holding foreign licences generally have up to two years; after six months they must also carry an approved Turkish translation. Continued driving after the applicable period requires a Turkish licence. The licence must also authorise the vehicle concerned. [4]

Kasko General Conditions A.5.4 address driving without the legally required licence; A.7 permits specified-driver or use restrictions in the policy. Identify the precise, legally applicable clause and evidence. A rental company’s acceptance of a licence does not decide its legal validity. Its contract restrictions are separate from compulsory third-party rights. A licence problem can therefore raise kasko or recourse issues without automatically defeating every injured third party’s claim. [3]

5. Alcohol/drug exclusions are claim-specific

An insurer should establish the relevant fact and legal/policy consequence.

Police medical records can be decisive.

Do not accept an exclusion based solely on suspicion or an unrelated administrative offence.

6. Late notification does not always justify full rejection automatically

Policy and statutory duties require timely notice, but the legal consequence of delay depends on the regime, prejudice and applicable insurance law.

Explain unavoidable reasons for delay and provide evidence.

Foreign travel after an accident should be documented.

For example, Turkish Commercial Code Article 1446 links a late-notice reduction to an increase in the insurance payment and the degree of fault, and prevents reliance on that rule where the insurer already knew of the event. Notice obligations and a claimant’s limitation period are different questions. Report promptly and preserve proof of when the insurer learned of the accident. [5]

7. Pre-existing damage can reduce but should not erase unrelated new damage

The insurer can distinguish old and new damage. Claimant should provide pre-accident photographs/service records where available.

An expert can identify impact consistency.

Do not claim old dents as new accident loss.

8. Repair-method disputes can concern parts and labour

Insurer and repairer may disagree about replacement versus repair, OEM versus equivalent parts or labour hours.

Independent expert evidence can resolve technical necessity and reasonable cost.

Preserve damaged parts/photos before disposal.

9. Total-loss valuation can be challenged

A total-loss offer should be compared with the vehicle’s actual pre-accident market value and salvage treatment.

Comparable listings must be genuinely comparable.

Foreign/imported vehicle valuation can require specialist evidence.

10. Value loss is a separate issue

A traffic insurer can accept repair cost but reject value-loss compensation.

Circular 2026/22 provides for informing claimants that value loss is calculated alongside vehicle damage. Check both heads of loss in the assessment and request the reason for any refusal. [1]

Do not assume a kasko policy covers value loss unless the contract says so.

11. Bodily injury rejection needs medical/legal review

An insurer can dispute causation, disability or coverage.

Submit complete medical records and the appropriate disability assessment.

A low initial offer should be compared with a proper damages calculation.

12. Fraud suspicion should be addressed with evidence

Insurers can investigate staged accidents or inconsistent damage patterns.

A genuine claimant should provide location, CCTV, witnesses, telematics and repair evidence.

False documents can create criminal consequences; never manufacture proof.

13. Formal insurer application is important before arbitration/litigation

For compulsory traffic-insurance claims, Road Traffic Act Article 97 requires a written application to the insurer before proceedings. If no written answer is provided within 15 calendar days, or the response gives rise to a dispute over meeting the demand, court or qualifying insurance arbitration proceedings can follow. For other insurance branches, including kasko, the Commission’s ordinary no-response period is 15 working days; a final adverse response can also satisfy the prior-application requirement. These are procedural waiting periods, not general filing deadlines. [6]

State the claim type, amount or calculation basis and disputed reason; attach the relevant policy, accident report, evidence of damage and required supporting documents. Preserve delivery and any accepted OHİM record. A regulatory complaint alone should not be assumed to replace a properly documented claim or preserve limitation. [1]

14. Insurance Arbitration Commission is a specialist route

For voluntary insurance, including kasko, check the insurer’s Commission membership and whether the insured event occurred after membership began. The Commission states that compulsory-insurance disputes arising after 18 April 2013 can be submitted regardless of membership. A dispute already taken to court, ordinary arbitration or the Consumer Arbitration Committee cannot also be pursued before the Commission. [6]

Unfinished expert assessment needs an additional check. SEDDK’s administrative guidance in Circular 2026/02, based on the decision of 5 August 2026, addresses motor property-damage applications: where SBM records establish timely expert appointment and an unfinished report for reasons not attributable to the insurer, this is not treated as an adverse or inadequate response. Check this condition before assuming a live assessment permits immediate arbitration. The document does not set a new universal waiting period or a separate accident-date cutoff. [7]

The Commission appoints an insurance arbitrator and uses its own procedure.

Current amount/appeal thresholds should be checked at filing because they can change.

15. Courts remain available in appropriate cases

Some disputes involve defendants beyond the insurer or legal issues better suited to court.

Jurisdiction depends on consumer/commercial/traffic relationships and claimant status.

Do not assume every insurance case belongs to the same court.

Check any mandatory pre-action mediation requirement for the particular court claim. For pecuniary accident-damage claims, Article 109 of the Road Traffic Act generally gives two years from knowledge of the damage and liable person, subject to an overall ten years from the accident; a longer criminal limitation period can apply. Kasko’s contractual limitation rule is different: Commercial Code Article 1420 generally provides two years from when payment becomes due and an overall six years from the insured event, subject to special provisions. Suspension, interruption and the applicable version of the law require individual review. Do not wait for informal negotiations to finish before checking time limits. [8] [5]

16. Foreign-language documents should be translated selectively

Foreign repair invoices, medical reports and ownership documents can support the claim.

Translate documents necessary to prove the disputed issue.

Keep originals.

17. Settlement and release scope should be explicit

A settlement of property damage should state whether value loss, loss of use or bodily injury is included.

Broad releases can create later disputes.

Do not sign a full discharge before understanding all claim heads.

18. Interest and default depend on legal demand history

The start of interest can differ according to defendant and claim.

A dated, complete insurer application is important evidence.

Do not use one interest start date for all parties automatically.

19. Foreign claimant payment logistics should be arranged securely

Insurers may request Turkish/foreign bank details and identity verification.

Use an account matching the lawful claimant or documented representative arrangement.

A payment to an intermediary should be authorised transparently.

20. Build the challenge around one rejection reason at a time

Create a table: insurer reason, policy/statutory clause, insurer evidence, claimant response, supporting document and amount affected.

This produces a focused arbitration or lawsuit.

Emotional accusations about the insurer do not substitute for coverage analysis.

Conclusion

Motor-insurance disputes in Türkiye are solved by reading the policy and statutory framework against the accident evidence. ALO193 improves claims handling, but a rejection still requires a documented legal challenge through the insurer, arbitration or court.