Vehicle Depreciation Due to Traffic Accidents

Due to the replacement, repair, painting, etc., of parts involved in traffic accidents, when a used vehicle is offered on the market, it suffers a loss in value compared to other vehicles with identical specifications because it has undergone such procedures and damaged vehicle .

Our legal system does not contain specific regulations regarding such losses in value . However, this does not mean that the resulting damages will not be compensated. If there is no specific regulation in the law, a legal basis for compensation is provided by applying general legal provisions.

Vehicle Depreciation Coverage

The most general provision we will refer to regarding vehicle depreciation is undoubtedly Article 49 of the Turkish Code of Obligations. According to this provision, 'Anyone who causes damage to another through a culpable and unlawful act is obliged to compensate for that damage.' We should establish the connection between this and vehicle depreciation as follows: Although individuals suffer other damages as a result of traffic accidents, the damage we will consider here is the depreciation of the vehicle. A traffic accident will be considered a tort . As a result of a tort, individuals will be obligated to compensate for the resulting damages.

Another legal basis is Article 1459 of the Turkish Commercial Code. According to this provision, 'The insurer shall compensate the insured for the damage suffered.' Therefore, the principle referred to in both articles is full compensation.

Article 90 of the Highway Traffic Law states: "Compensation under compulsory financial liability insurance is subject to the procedures and principles stipulated in this Law and the general conditions prepared within the framework of this Law. Regarding matters not regulated in this Law and the general conditions concerning said compensation and non-pecuniary damages, the provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 dated 11/1/2011 concerning torts shall apply." Thus, a reference is made to general provisions.

Distinguishing Between Total Loss Vehicles and Damaged Vehicles

Before delving into the details, it's important to note that the subject of this article and the scope of legal regulations apply to vehicles that can be repaired and those that have suffered a loss in value after repair . At this point, it's necessary to distinguish between a repaired (or potentially repairable) vehicle and a total loss vehicle. Briefly, the loss of value is not relevant for a total loss vehicle. This is because the value of an existing item is no longer the same as it was the day before the accident. However, the item still exists. The vehicle in question has completely lost its functionality and has lost its economic value and function entirely (excluding its scrap value). Therefore, a total loss vehicle will no longer be subject to a loss-of-value discussion; the entire vehicle will be the subject of compensation. Compensation will not be paid without presenting the scrap registration certificate to the insurance company . Compensation will be paid upon presentation of the registration certificate stating, "The vehicle has been withdrawn from traffic."

The 17th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, in its decision numbered 2016/2020 E., 2016/5739 K., dated 10/05/2016, ruled as follows: 'In this case , the court should have considered the model, age, extent of damage resulting from the accident, mileage, usage style, etc., of the plaintiff's vehicle to determine whether repair or total loss is more economical. If total loss is more economical, the court should have determined the vehicle's second-hand market value and salvage value (its value in its damaged state) at the time of the incident, as well as the reasonable time required for the plaintiff to purchase a new vehicle of the same model. The court should have also determined the amount of loss of vehicle after deducting the necessary expenses (fuel costs, etc.) that the plaintiff would incur during this period. A detailed, verifiable expert report on these matters should have been obtained from an expert in damage assessment, and a decision should have been made based on the findings of this report . The judgment rendered in the manner described is deemed incorrect.' As can be understood from this, the items that will be examined at the discretion of the judge in case of vehicle depreciation are listed, and the compensation limits for the victims are shown.

Finally, regarding total loss vehicles, it's worth mentioning a practice the judge employs when awarding compensation. When the court debates whether a vehicle involved in an accident is a total loss or repairable, the parties' statements and the judge's discretion can lead to different outcomes. For example, if A severely damages B's vehicle, and A claims the vehicle has scrap value , while B states it has no economic value , the judge might award A the scrap parts and fully compensate for the damage. This practice, considered quite fair, allows everyone to weigh their statements and desires against the consequences. Ultimately, the injured party has already suffered a loss; this practice is quite reasonable in order to spare them the trouble of dealing with a scrap vehicle. Otherwise, if the vehicle truly has scrap value, the judge would make an adjustment in the compensation, leaving the scrap parts to the injured party and deducting the scrap value from the fully awarded compensation .

Additional Expenses

There is no doubt that the damage will be fully compensated. However, in practice, the person responsible for the tort is also held liable under the same scope

1. Court costs
2. Appraisal fee

These additional expenses, unrelated to the vehicle's depreciation, will be passed on to the responsible party regardless of the amount of compensation. Such expenses will also be claimed by the party causing the damage under the tort liability scheme.

In its ruling numbered 2016/5175 E. 2016/7153 K. and dated 13/06/2016, the 17th Civil Chamber stated that expert witness and inspection fees should also be included in litigation costs and found the local court's decision to exclude these items from litigation costs to be erroneous

 According to Article 1426 of the Turkish Commercial Code, 'The insurer is obliged to pay the reasonable expenses incurred by the policyholder, insured, and beneficiary for the purpose of determining the scope of the risk, compensation, or payment obligation, even if these expenses prove fruitless.' This statement is in line with the decision of the 17th Civil Chamber.

Application to the Insurance Company

The following information is sufficient to apply for insurance: the vehicle license plate number of the applicant or claimant, the license plate number of the vehicle that caused the wrongful act, the date of the accident, the ZMM policy number of the vehicle at fault from which compensation is claimed, the amount of depreciation claimed, and supporting evidence.

However, obtaining an expert report beforehand is not recommended. If the damage is determined, it is not possible to file a claim for an uncertain amount.

Condition for filing a lawsuit

Article 97 of the Turkish Road Traffic Law states, "The injured party must submit a written application to the relevant insurance company before resorting to legal action within the limits stipulated in the compulsory financial liability insurance. If the insurance company fails to respond in writing within 15 days of the application date , or if there is a dispute regarding whether the response satisfies the claim, the injured party may file a lawsuit or apply for arbitration within the framework of Law No. 5684." Thus, application to the insurance company is made a prerequisite for filing a lawsuit.

For more information on this matter, you can consult with our firm's experienced criminal defense lawyers.

Trainee Lawyer Hamdi Berk CAN