19 / 35
The insured person enters his/her
accident details and request of expert
appointment to the Insurance
Center system (EKSİST)
The expert is FREELY
appointed via EKSİST
The expert informs the insured via
EKSİST of his/her approval or rejection
within 3 WORKING DAYS
APPROVAL
OR
REJECT
Expert accepts
the work.
EXPERT WORK REJECTION
EXPERT WORK
APPROVAL
Expert rejects
the appointment
In case it is requested, EKSİST makes the
third appointment. The expert is obliged to accept the assignment.
Insurance company
accepts or rejects
within one working day
Expert accepts the appointment
Expert rejects the appointment
In case it is requested, EKSİST makes the third appointment.
The expert is obliged to accept the assignment.
COMPANY REJECTION
INSURED
COMPANY
COMPANY APPROVAL
FINISH
INSURED
COMPANY
Insurance Company informs EKSİST via web
service of the appointment of the expert before
request or the designation of expert in relation
to the request
Agreement between experts
In case of failure to come to
an agreement, a 3rd expert is
appointed via EKSİST. The 3rd
expert prepares the report and the
fee is shared by the parties
Work Flow
previous circular may be outlined as follows:
Options were added for the insurant to appoint the
expert freely or randomly in the beginning of the expert
appointment process.
The assessment period of the expert appointment request
was increased from 2 hours to 3 business days.
If no notifications were made by the expert on behalf of
accepting or rejecting, it is assumed that the job was
accepted by the expert.
By these changes, general flow of the EKSİST system was
established as follows.
Conclusion
I hope the trust in insurance, the main problem of insurance
industry, further strengthens with this application. In this
application, all stakeholders of the industry will stay in very
close contact with each other. It can be possible to meet
on a common goal in respect of the insurants' seeking their
rights, the experts' represent independence of the "expertise
institution" in the best way, and the insurance companies'
having to examine the events in more detail in their struggle
with abuse.
My wish is that the insurants, experts and insurance
companies do not fall into too much disputes in respect of
the appointments within the system, and not much duty
falls on dispute experts.
Finally, an Insurance Expert filed a lawsuit for stay of the
execution before the Supreme Court of Appeals. The
Supreme Court of Appeals awarded the decree of stay
of the execution on the ground that several articles of
the circular were not in conformity with article 22 of the
Insurance Law No. 5684.
Main reasons of the decree of stay of the execution can be
listed as:
The experts are appointed randomly by the system (they
should be appointed freely according to the law).
The expert has to notify whether he/she accepts or
rejects the appointment request within 2 hours (this
period is 3 days according to the law).
The expert is deemed to have rejected if he/she does not
reply the appointment request in due time (according to
the law, the expert is deemed to have accepted if he/she
does not notify a reply).
After the resolution of annulment, Undersecretariat of Trea-
sure published a circular dated 29 April and No. 2013/7,
and the NEW EKSİST entered into force again as of 13 May
2013.
New EKSİST
By the circular of the Undersecretariat of Treasury dated 29
April and No. 2013/7, the contradictions with the law were
revised. The steps differing between this circular and the
EXPERT VIEW 19