Driver A.T. is waiting at a red light in his vehicle when a vehicle driven by B.K. approaches from behind and crashes into A.T.’s vehicle due to failure to slow down. In the Accident Detection Report kept at the scene, driver B.K. is found 100% at fault.

A.T.’s vehicle is repaired at an authorized service, and all repair costs are covered by the Compulsory Traffic Insurance of the at-fault driver B.K. However, A.T.’s vehicle is now processed into the TRAMER record as “accident-involved,” which has significantly reduced the vehicle’s second-hand market value.

A.T. prepares an adjuster report to be compensated for this drop in market value and applies to the opposing party’s insurance company for “vehicle depreciation compensation” (araç değer kaybı tazminatı). The insurance company rejects the request in writing on the grounds that “the vehicle has already been repaired and restored to its former state, parts were replaced with originals, and there is no additional loss.”

Legal Evaluation This case is one of the most frequently encountered disputes in insurance law.

1. “Vehicle Depreciation” is a Legal Right According to consistent decisions of the Supreme Court (Yargıtay), no matter how well a vehicle is repaired, its second-hand market value objectively drops the moment an accident is recorded in TRAMER. This drop is a “real loss” caused by the accident. The party who has no fault or less fault in the accident has the right to claim this loss.

2. The Responsible Party’s Insurance is Obliged to Pay Under the Highway Traffic Law, the Compulsory Traffic Insurance of the at-fault party is obliged to cover the material damages caused by the accident. Vehicle depreciation is a part of these material damages. The insurance company’s defense that “we repaired the vehicle” does not compensate for the drop in the vehicle’s market value and is therefore not a legally valid reason for rejection.

Legal Result and Solution Methods Upon the unjust rejection decision of the insurance company, A.T. has two main paths:

  • 1. Litigation Path (Commercial Court of First Instance): A.T. can file a receivable lawsuit against the insurance company in the Commercial Court. However, this path is generally not preferred due to long trial periods and higher court costs.

  • 2. Insurance Arbitration Commission Path (Most Effective Way): This special path created for consumers is much faster and less costly than courts.

How Did the Arbitration Process Work? A.T. applies online (or in person) to the Insurance Arbitration Commission with the rejection letter from the insurance company and the depreciation expert report in hand.

  • Speed: The Commission assigns the application to an insurance arbitrator who is an expert in the relevant field. The arbitrator examines the file (and an additional expert report if necessary) and usually renders a decision within a short period like 4-6 months.

  • Binding Effect: The decision given by the arbitrator is equivalent to a court judgment up to a certain monetary limit (this limit is updated annually) and is binding on the insurance company.

  • Probable Result: In this case, since A.T. is 100% faultless and it is fixed with concrete evidence (expert report) that he suffered a loss of value, it is highly probable that the Arbitration Commission will rule in favor of A.T. and sentence the insurance company to pay the depreciation.

Conclusion and Advice It can become a standard procedure for insurance companies to reject depreciation claims after a traffic accident. However, this does not mean you should give up on your legal right. The Insurance Arbitration Commission exists specifically to resolve such disputes quickly. If your vehicle’s value has dropped in an accident where you are faultless, applying to the Arbitration Commission with the support of an insurance law lawyer is the fastest and most effective way to get your right.