Independently verifying a building-insurance policy
A buyer should be able to confirm what a building-insurance policy actually protects without relying only on a seller’s description or a one-page policy schedule. In Türkiye, SEDDK publishes separate general conditions for fire insurance and compulsory earthquake insurance. That separation matters: a voluntary building policy is not automatically DASK, and the word “building insurance” does not by itself reveal which losses are insured.
Identify the contract before discussing coverage
Record the insurer, policy number, insured party, policy start and expiry dates, insured address and the description of the building. Then locate the general conditions and any special conditions or endorsements that form part of the contract. If the policy was amended after issue, the latest endorsement can change an insured amount, address, deductible or coverage detail, so the schedule and endorsements must be read together rather than as competing documents.
Under SEDDK’s Fire Insurance General Conditions, the basic fire cover includes direct material damage to insured property caused by fire, lightning and explosion, together with smoke, steam and heat resulting from fire or explosion. The same conditions also explain which building components fall within the insured value unless the contract says otherwise, and that land value is not included when the insured amount for immovable property is determined. These are useful reference points, but the actual policy must still be checked for its own insured subject and terms.
Rebuild the answer from an independent source path
Independent verification means more than comparing two copies supplied by the same person. The reviewer should use the insurer’s policy information where available and the applicable SEDDK general conditions to establish what type of policy it is. Then match the address, use of the building, insured party and insured amount to the property being purchased. A policy for a different block, common area or another unit cannot be rescued merely because the insurer and owner name look familiar.
Read extensions and exclusions carefully
Fire-policy wording can distinguish basic insured events from risks that require additional agreement. SEDDK’s general conditions, for example, treat earthquake and volcanic eruption under a separate additional-contract structure in the fire-policy framework, while Türkiye also has the distinct compulsory DASK regime. A buyer should therefore avoid converting a mention of earthquake in one policy into a conclusion that all compulsory or voluntary earthquake needs have been satisfied.
Deductibles, limits, sublimits and special clauses also matter. A headline insured amount may apply to the building while particular losses are excluded or subject to different conditions. The correct question is not “Is there insurance?” but “Which insured property, which peril, which period and which monetary limit does this contract address?”
Keep insurance separate from technical condition
A valid policy proves an insurance contract, not that the building is free of defects. Structural inspection, energy performance and legal building status are separate evidence questions. Likewise, DASK should be checked as its own compulsory-earthquake file. Keeping these boundaries clear prevents a voluntary policy from being used to support claims it was never designed to prove.
Independent-verification conclusion
The building-insurance record is independently supported when the policy can be identified through its insurer and number, its current wording and endorsements are available, the insured building and address match the transaction, and the buyer can state the covered perils, material exclusions, insured amount, deductible and coverage period without relying solely on a sales summary. Any unresolved mismatch should remain visible until the insurer or authoritative contract documentation explains it.