An insurance adviser may be liable if he has not exercised the care that can be expected of a reasonably competent and reasonably acting adviser. To obtain compensation, you must also show what loss that error caused. A rejection by the insurer therefore does not in itself prove that your insurance intermediary has to pay the full loss.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: Verzekeringsadviseur heeft een fout gemaakt: kunt u uw schade verhalen?
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Sigorta danışmanınız hata yaptı: zararınızı tazmin ettirebilir misiniz?
Written by Onur Arslan, attorney at Arslan Advocaten. Registered in the specialisation register of the Netherlands Bar for employment law and personal injury. Last updated: 22 September 2026.
You engage an adviser to make risks understandable and to arrange suitable insurance. If, after a loss, it turns out that important cover is missing, the obvious question is: should the adviser have warned you about this? The answer starts with the engagement, the information you provided and the advice file.
What duty of care does an insurance intermediary have?
The adviser’s duty of care concerns advising and acting carefully within the agreed scope of the services. His expertise, your wishes, the insured risk and the information he knew or should have known all play a role. Article 7:401 of the Dutch Civil Code (BW) is the starting point here: the contractor must exercise the care of a good contractor in carrying out his work. For an insurance intermediary, case law has defined this as the care that can be expected of a reasonably competent and reasonably acting professional colleague: he has the necessary expertise, protects his client’s financial interests to the best of his knowledge and ability, and takes due care in giving advice.
The engagement may go further than simply taking out a policy. Changes that become known during the term of the policy may also call for action. The precise scope must be assessed case by case. Not every adviser is required, on his own initiative, to keep investigating every possible risk or every cheaper policy on the market.
A recent example of that limit can be found in ruling 2025-0929 of Kifid, the Dutch Financial Services Complaints Tribunal: a duty of aftercare was not equated with a general obligation to keep looking for lower premiums with other insurers.
Common errors in insurance advice
An error may consist of an application that was never submitted, an incorrect sum insured, insufficient explanation of a material exclusion or failure to pass on a relevant change. Another example is cancelling an old policy before the new cover has been confirmed.
For business owners, disputes may arise about the insured activities, an indemnity period for business interruption that is too short or an incorrect turnover basis. For private individuals, issues such as underinsurance, letting out the home and missing cover for valuables play a role.
The error must be made specific. ‘I thought everything was insured’ is an understandable expectation, but not a clearly defined complaint. A stronger version is: ‘I reported by email that I was going to let out the home; the adviser confirmed that everything had been arranged, but did not request any change.’
A low premium does not remove the need for an explanation
If you want cheap insurance, it must be made clear what protection you are giving up in return. An advice file must be able to show that you could make an informed choice about relevant risks.
In Kifid ruling 2022-0209, the issue was insufficient explanation of underinsurance. The wish to find a cheap solution did not remove the need for a specific warning. That does not mean that every low sum insured is an advice error; the explanation given and the choice made remain decisive.
How do you prove what the adviser should have done?
Request the engagement letter, the service agreement, the needs assessment, advice reports, application forms, change requests and notes of meetings. Also keep your own emails, messages and diary entries. Put the events in a timeline and link each complaint to a document or a specific agreement.
Then have it established what careful conduct would have been in that situation. That may be asking additional questions, warning about a limitation or applying for different cover in good time. Knowing with hindsight that a loss has occurred is not enough; what matters is what the adviser could and should have done at the time.
If you took out insurance directly without advice, the assessment is different. Check whether advice was actually given or whether there was only mediation or execution. Marketing texts, the application process and written agreements can help to establish that role.
The causal link is often the decisive point
Suppose an adviser should have warned you. What would you have done then? You must substantiate the situation without the error as specifically as possible. Was suitable cover available? Would the insurer have accepted the risk? Could you pay the premium, and would you actually have done so? Would the loss have fallen under that other cover?
An error may be established while compensation is still not awarded. In Kifid ruling 2024-0504, an intermediary fell short in the information about vacancy of the property, but the compensation claimed was not awarded because the consequences of that shortcoming had not been sufficiently demonstrated.
So collect not only evidence of the error, but also, for example, a quotation available at the time, acceptance information and indications that you would have chosen broader cover. A statement made afterwards carries more weight if it is consistent with documents from that period.
What loss can you claim?
The starting point is the financial comparison between the actual situation and the situation without the error. A missed insurance payout may be an important item. The excess, the premium you would otherwise have paid, applicable maximums and amounts you already receive must also be taken into account.
| Item | Situation without the error | Actual situation | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Covered loss | €30,000 | €30,000 | – |
| Less: excess | − €1,000 | − €1,000 | – |
| Payout you should have received | €29,000 | – | |
| Payout already received | – | €10,000 | |
| Difference before premium adjustment | €29,000 − €10,000 | €19,000 | |
| Less: extra premium you would have paid without the error | A suitable policy would have been more expensive: for example €120 per year × 5 years | − €600 | |
| Claim against the adviser | €18,400 | ||
The costs of experts and legal assistance are not recoverable without limit. Have each cost item assessed to see whether there is a legal basis and whether the costs are reasonable. Your own conduct may also play a role, for example if a clear warning was ignored or requested information was not provided.
Holding the adviser liable
Write down what the engagement was, what the adviser did or failed to do, why you consider that inadequate and what loss results from it. Enclose an initial calculation and the key pieces of evidence. Ask for a substantive response and for the matter to be reported to any professional liability insurer.
Reporting the matter to that insurer is not an admission of liability. Two time limits require immediate action here, and they run side by side:
- The duty to complain (Article 6:89 of the Dutch Civil Code): you can no longer invoke a defect in the performance if you did not protest to the adviser within a reasonable time after you discovered the defect or ought reasonably to have discovered it. So do not wait until the dispute with your own insurer has been fought to the end.
- The limitation period (Article 3:310(1) of the Dutch Civil Code): five years from the day after the day on which you became aware of both the loss and the liable person, with an absolute limit of twenty years after the event.
So as soon as you suspect the error, send a short notification that can be kept as proof, even if the extent of the loss has not yet been established:
Example: first notification to your adviser
Dear [name],
On [date], my claim under policy [number] was [rejected / only partly paid], because [the insurer’s reason]. I hold you liable for this. In my view, when [taking out the policy in … / changing …] you should have pointed out [the risk / the condition] to me, and you did not do so.
With this letter I expressly and promptly protest about the way in which you carried out your engagement, and I unequivocally reserve my right to compensation for all loss resulting from it. The extent of that loss has not yet been established; I will come back to this as soon as the settlement with the insurer is clear.
I ask you to report this notification to your professional liability insurer and to confirm this to me, and also to provide me with a copy of the complete advice file, including the client profile, the advice report and the correspondence about this insurance.
Yours sincerely,
[Name, date]
This letter does two things at once: it satisfies the duty to complain under Article 6:89 of the Dutch Civil Code and interrupts the limitation period under Article 3:317 of the Dutch Civil Code. Send it by registered post or ask for an acknowledgement of receipt, and keep the proof. A dispute with your own insurer does not preserve your rights against the adviser; run both tracks in parallel.
Related topics
Frequently asked questions about errors by insurance advisers
Is the adviser liable if I am underinsured?
Not automatically. It must be investigated how the amount was determined, what explanation you received and what choices you made. It must also be clear what loss any shortcoming in the advice has caused.
Can the adviser say that I should have read the policy?
Your own responsibility may be taken into account. That does not rule out an advice error from the outset. The adviser’s expert role and the explanation of material limitations must also be assessed.
Is a verbal promise sufficient?
A verbal agreement may be relevant, but proving it can be difficult. Look for supporting messages, confirmations or witnesses and note precisely when and in what context the promise was made.
Can I pursue the insurer and the adviser at the same time?
That can be sensible in certain situations. The claims do, however, have different legal bases. You cannot be compensated twice for the same loss, and you must align agreements in one track with the other.
Can a business owner take a complaint about advice to Kifid?
That is not possible for every business insurance policy. Check whether the complainant, the service provider and the product fall within the applicable rules. If not, the civil courts may be an option.
What if the advice file is missing?
Ask in writing for the available documents and an explanation for any missing parts. The absence of a file does not automatically decide the case, but it can have consequences for how positions are substantiated.
Have your advice file assessed
Have you suffered a loss as a result of possibly incorrect insurance advice? Contact Arslan Advocaten. Have the advice, the policy and the rejection letter to hand. Also read about underinsurance after a loss and how we handle insurance disputes.
Legally reviewed by Onur Arslan, attorney at Arslan Advocaten. Reviewed on 13 September 2026.
