DASK risks that should be resolved before title transfer
DASK is not merely a document requested by the closing team. For buildings and independent units within the statutory scope, the law requires compulsory earthquake insurance to be evidenced as valid for relevant title-registration transactions, and its existence is also checked for relevant water and electricity subscription procedures. Therefore the existence of “a policy” is not enough; it must be in force and belong to the correct property.
1. Policy-property mismatch
Match the address, address code and building/unit data to the actual property. A valid policy for a nearby address or a different independent unit does not close the requirement.
2. Expiry before closing
Check inception and expiry on the transaction date itself. A policy that was valid at reservation but expired before title transfer remains an open issue until renewed and verifiable.
3. DASK confused with comprehensive home insurance
DASK covers specified direct material damage from earthquake and direct earthquake-caused fire, explosion, tsunami and landslide within policy limits and terms. It does not automatically insure contents, theft, rental loss or every fire and water risk. If a lender or contract requires broader protection, verify a separate voluntary policy.
4. DASK sum insured treated as property valuation
The compulsory insurance amount is determined under tariff and construction rules; it is not market value and does not include land value. Do not use the DASK amount as proof that purchase price is fair or that all rebuilding and contents exposure is insured.
5. Incorrect building data
Licence year, construction type, storey count, risk group and area can affect tariff or policy calculation. A material mismatch between policy data and the actual building should be corrected before reliance.
6. Assuming every building is within scope
The law and general conditions define both included and excluded buildings. Fully non-residential use and certain building-status conditions require careful scope verification rather than an assumption that ordinary DASK resolves the issue.
7. Treating DASK as structural certification
Issuance of a policy does not certify structural safety and does not replace engineering inspection, permit review or site-specific earthquake-risk assessment.
8. Outdated tariff
SEDDK and DASK publish current tariff instructions. The compulsory earthquake tariff was updated at the end of 2025 for the current period, so old premium tables should not be used to validate a new policy.
Risk outcome
Pass when the policy is in force, property-matched and scope is understood. Hold for address, date or building-data mismatches. Escalate when statutory scope or special building status is uncertain. Never treat DASK as a substitute for broader voluntary insurance or technical due diligence.
DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review
What the official record proves
For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, site earthquake hazard must be separated from the structural safety of the particular building. AFAD’s current national hazard map became effective on 1 January 2019 and describes location-based seismic hazard; it is not a structural-safety certificate for an individual building. Building review requires age, structural system, visible alterations and technical records, and serious concerns may justify specialist inspection or the statutory risky-building process under Law 6306. DASK is financial earthquake insurance for covered properties, not proof of structural resistance, and its compulsory policy is issued for one year and requires renewal. For subject-specific due diligence, these distinct evidentiary layers should never substitute for one another.
Reconcile record and reality
For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, authenticity is established through the issuing authority and chain of acquisition, not by the appearance of a PDF or an institutional logo. If bank-account or payment instructions change by email or message, the change should be confirmed through an independent, previously verified channel before funds move; a genuine contract does not make later payment instructions automatically genuine. Official systems such as EİDS or Web Tapu prove only the elements within their scope and should not be used to legitimize unrelated data. For subject-specific due diligence, preserve old and new versions, receipt time, sender, verification channel and result; that audit trail is what later exposes silent substitution or forged versions.
Limits of the evidence
For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, the legal form of a document must be identified rather than assuming every private contract or notarized paper has the same effect. The Notary Law also allows notaries to execute real-estate sale contracts within the statutory system, while registry, identity and representation data remain decisive. Where a power of attorney is used, the authority relevant to sale, purchase, price handling, mortgage or the particular act is checked; broad wording should not be treated automatically as unlimited authority. For subject-specific due diligence, versions, certifications, translations and attachments are preserved in sequence, and any change to a page, amount or party triggers re-verification before reliance.
Decision consequence
For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, the land-registry record must be separated from marketing descriptions. TKGM lists party identification and, where representation is used, the representation document among sale-transaction materials; the registered owner, independent-unit details and recorded restrictions remain the controlling evidence when descriptions conflict. Names, identity or passport data and property identifiers should therefore be reconciled before signature, and the registry output relied upon should be preserved with its retrieval date. This is especially material to subject-specific due diligence, because an unexplained identity or asset mismatch can change whether the transaction can proceed at all.
Primary and official sources
- DASK — Poliçe Sorgulama — https://dask.gov.tr/tr/police-sorgulama
- DASK — Teminat ve Kapsam — https://dask.gov.tr/tr/teminat-ve-kapsami
- DASK — ZDS Genel Şartlar — https://dask.gov.tr/tr/zds-genel-sartlar
- DASK — Sıkça Sorulan Sorular — https://dask.gov.tr/tr/sss
- DASK Required Information — https://dask.gov.tr/tr/gerekli-bilgi-ve-belgeler
- Ministry of Environment — Risky Building Process — https://istanbulakdm.csb.gov.tr/riskli-yapi-sureci-104407
- Ministry of Justice — Notary Law — https://mevzuat.adalet.gov.tr/mevzuat/103477
- TKGM — sale transaction documents / Web Tapu — https://www.tkgm.gov.tr/sss
Evidence and decision plan for DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review
The due-diligence purpose of “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review” is to identify the material ways the topic can fail, then connect each risk to evidence and a transaction consequence. A reviewer should be able to trace every material conclusion to a current source and identify any assumption that has not yet become evidence.
Evidence to assemble
- For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, match the property and party identifiers in the evidence to the asset and people actually involved; a correct document for the wrong unit or person does not close the check.
- For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, record issuer, source, issue or retrieval date and version where available, then distinguish an original/current record from a scan, translation, draft, expired copy or superseded version.
- For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, compare documentary status with the physical, payment or operational reality relevant to the topic and write down every unexplained difference before commitment.
- For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, convert each unresolved difference into a named condition: evidence required, person responsible, deadline and the consequence if the condition is not satisfied.
Official reference to recheck
The source register for “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review” includes DASK — Poliçe Sorgulama (https://dask.gov.tr/tr/police-sorgulama). Use that source for the matters within its authority and recheck it when timing or rules are material; it does not replace a registry, engineering, tax, banking or contractual record that the specific decision separately requires.
Decision boundary
For “DASK earthquake insurance Risk Review”, a residual issue should remain open whenever its legal, technical, tax, payment or cost consequence cannot yet be measured. The file is ready only when that issue is closed or consciously accepted by the appropriate decision-maker.