Does your legal expenses insurer believe that your case has no reasonable prospect of success, or do you disagree about the legal approach? Ask for a reasoned position and look into the disputes procedure in your policy. It allows an independent expert to assess the disagreement. A refusal of cover, a complaint about how your case is handled and a request for your own lawyer each call for a separate assessment. Arslan Advocaten can help you choose the right route and examine whether we can handle your case.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: Rechtsbijstand zegt dat uw zaak geen kans maakt: zo gebruikt u de geschillenregeling
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Hukuki koruma sigortacınız davanızın şansı olmadığını söylüyor: uyuşmazlık düzenlemesini böyle kullanırsınız
Written by Onur Arslan, attorney at Arslan Advocaten. Registered in the Netherlands Bar’s register of specialist areas for employment law and personal injury. Onur Arslan practised for many years as a corporate lawyer and insolvency trustee (curator) and has extensive experience in financial law disputes. Last updated: 22 September 2026.
Start with the reason your legal assistance is ending
A message that your file is being closed can mean different things. The insurer may take the view that the conflict falls outside your insurance. Alternatively, the case handler may accept that the case is covered but expect that litigation will not achieve enough. That difference determines which arguments matter.
Ask, therefore, for a written explanation setting out the relevant policy conditions and the legal assessment. Which claim was examined? Which facts does the case handler consider established? Where is evidence lacking? What result does the case handler consider achievable? A brief statement that continuing makes no sense gives you little to go on for a substantive response.
In a coverage dispute, the issue is, for example, the insured module, when the conflict began or your capacity as an employee or business owner. This requires an assessment of the policy and the timeline. In a dispute about prospects, the issue is the substantive merits of your case. The disputes procedure may be relevant to that second type of disagreement. Also read our explanation of refused legal assistance.
What the disputes procedure does
Article 4:68 of the Financial Supervision Act (Wft) provides the statutory framework for an objective procedure in the event of a disagreement about how a case is handled. The procedure is worked out in more detail in the policy. According to the explanation by Kifid, the Dutch Financial Services Complaints Tribunal, the disputes procedure covers differences of opinion about the prospects of success or the legal approach. The independent assessment is usually binding. It is therefore not merely a matter of obtaining an extra opinion that the parties can then ignore. See Kifid Kennis on the disputes procedure and second opinions.
The procedure does not directly decide your wage claim, tenancy dispute or personal injury claim against the other party. It assesses the disagreement between you and the legal assistance provider. A favourable opinion can lead to further legal assistance, but it is not a court ruling upholding the underlying claim. The opposing party can still dispute your claim.
A positive opinion on a specific procedural step also does not mean that every subsequent step will be paid for without a fresh assessment. The instruction may be limited to the question whether a wage claim has a good chance of success, while damages or an appeal fall outside it. Read the instruction and the outcome side by side for that reason.
Make the disagreement concrete
An independent assessor must be able to see where the legal views diverge. First write down what result you want and why the case handler does not wish to pursue it. Then link your response to documents. A dispute about evidence requires a different explanation from a dispute about the interpretation of a contract.
A fictitious example: your employer denies that extra hours were agreed. The case handler believes there is insufficient evidence. You have e-mails with rostering instructions and messages in which the employer confirms your extra work. The useful question is then what these documents mean for the specific wage claim. Simply writing that the case handler is not taking your case seriously enough does not address that dispute about the evidence.
Another fictitious example: in a personal injury case, the case handler recommends a settlement. You consider the amount too low because future loss of income has not been sufficiently investigated. The disagreement may then concern the need for additional medical or vocational expert investigation. Do not only ask whether the total amount offered is too low; also have the assumptions underlying the loss calculation assessed.
Drafting a workable question
Describe the dispute, the desired result and the point on which you disagree. State the stage of the case. An opinion on whether to start proceedings is something different from an opinion on an appeal after an unfavourable judgment. Also state the latest date by which a response or procedural step is required.
One possible structure is: on the basis of the facts described and the documents enclosed, should the legal assistance provider pursue the proposed claim or procedural step? Ask for specific attention to the documents or arguments that you believe were given insufficient weight. A request to examine every conceivable area of law in your file usually makes the instruction less clear.
Discuss the question with the provider and record the final version in writing. Add your own position in a recognisable way. If the parties cannot agree on the wording, it must first be established how the applicable procedure deals with this. Do not assume that you have an unlimited right to keep adding new questions to the instruction during the assessment.
Check what information the expert may take into account. Under certain procedures, the assessment is confined to the file submitted. That makes preparation beforehand important. If you later discover new evidence, discuss whether the case handler should reassess the case or whether a different procedure is needed.
Which documents are needed
Start with the policy schedule, the applicable conditions and the case handler’s written position. Add the original agreement, the relevant decision or the claim form. In addition, put the most important correspondence and evidence in chronological order. For each document, briefly state which point it supports.
A timeline helps to keep events and legal time limits apart. Note when the conflict began, when you reported it, what action was taken and when the case handler gave their assessment. If there are proceedings, the procedural documents and decisions also belong in the file. Send a complete judgment, not only the passage you disagree with.
Include unfavourable documents as well. An assessor needs to know which counter-arguments can be expected in proceedings. Missing context can later render a seemingly favourable opinion useless. Point out if a document is missing and indicate from whom it can be obtained.
Limit the explanation to what helps the assessment. Dozens of repeated e-mails do not automatically make a file stronger. An index, a short statement of facts and a separate list of points in dispute give the assessor quicker access to the core of the matter. Do keep the original files and the complete correspondence, however.
Who appoints the independent expert
Follow the appointment procedure set out in the insurance. The insurer may designate an assessor together with you or use an appointment route via the dean of the local Bar. The expertise required depends on the underlying dispute. A substantial personal injury case calls for different experience from a rent dispute or a limitation period for forfeiture in employment law.
Check for prior involvement. A lawyer who has already advised you extensively on the same case may no longer be able to act as an independent assessor. So disclose what contacts and instructions there have been previously. Independence must be clear before the instruction is given.
Do not independently instruct a lawyer in advance in the expectation that the insurer will have to pay the bill afterwards. The formal procedure may impose requirements on the appointment, the question and the costs. A private second opinion outside that procedure is a different instruction. You can read more about this in our explanation of problems with legal expenses insurance.
Can Arslan take over your case afterwards
At the first contact, discuss what you want: an independent opinion or for our firm to handle your case. That choice may affect the role we can take on. ARAG, for example, states that for external follow-up handling, the independent assessor or anyone from their firm may not be chosen. That rule should not be applied to every policy without checking, but in an ARAG file it must be taken into account in advance. See ARAG disputes procedure.
If you mainly want Arslan to handle your original case, first have it examined which route is open for that. This may be a transfer, free choice of lawyer or a separate instruction. It is impractical to first accept an assessment role that stands in the way of the handling you want later.
We therefore assess the policy, the ongoing case, any previous instructions and the funding together. It must also be clear who is responsible for time limits and from what moment we take over the work. Merely sending your file does not in itself confirm that a new lawyer has accepted the case.
Costs and prior agreements
The costs of the formal assessment must be distinguished from the costs of advice you obtain yourself and from the later handling of the main case. Ask in writing which instruction falls under the disputes procedure, who bears the costs and which additional work will be budgeted separately. Also check whether the policy contains a cost cap or a special arrangement for external assistance.
A budget for further handling may include various items: lawyer’s work, court fees, expert investigation and a possible risk of an adverse costs order. Not every item is necessarily subject to the same cover or the same cap. Do not make a financial decision based solely on a quoted hourly rate.
When an insurer allows you your own lawyer, that does not automatically mean an unlimited budget is available. Have the scope of the instruction and the available compensation recorded. In a dispute about the budget, it can be assessed separately whether the restriction is compatible with the applicable right to choose. See cost cap with free choice of lawyer.
What a favourable opinion means
Read the decision in light of the questions that were put. Does the assessor agree with you on all points, or only on the need for an investigation or on a limited claim? Then ask for a concrete plan of action: what step will be taken, by whom and within what time frame?
An opinion that further investigation is needed may mean that the case will then have to be reassessed on its merits. It is no guarantee that the ultimate claim will succeed. An expert may also identify various litigation risks while still considering further handling justified.
Record follow-up arrangements in writing. Check whether the insurer actually implements the opinion and whether relevant deadlines are monitored in the meantime. If a new dispute arises about the interpretation of the opinion, specify exactly which part is not being complied with.
What you can do after an unfavourable opinion
An unfavourable outcome means that it must first be assessed what exactly has been decided in a binding manner. You may be dissatisfied with the result without the opinion being open to legal challenge. A second request on the same question is therefore not a given.
A serious defect in the way the opinion was reached or in its content may, however, be relevant. Think of an essential part of the file that was left out of the assessment, or a decision that does not address the agreed question. Concrete arguments are needed for this. The mere expectation that another lawyer would give a more favourable opinion is not enough.
Continuing the proceedings yourself may sometimes be an option. Under certain policy conditions, a later favourable result may affect reimbursement of reasonable costs. Before making that choice, have it assessed what outcome is required, which costs may count and which risks you bear yourself. Winning on one point does not automatically mean that every bill incurred will be reimbursed.
If the disputes procedure is refused
Ask on what grounds the request is being refused. If the provider says there is no substantive disagreement, point to the specific assessment you disagree with. If an opinion has already been given, explain whether the new request concerns the same issue or new facts and a different procedural step.
If the issue is in reality one of cover, prepare a coverage complaint. If the issue is poor availability, that calls for a service complaint and, where necessary, a measure to safeguard time limits. Several problems may arise at the same time, but they must each be dealt with recognisably.
Depending on the dispute, the internal complaints procedure, Kifid or the courts may play a role. Jurisdiction, time limits and binding effect must be checked for the specific route. Choosing a complaints body does not replace the assessment of an urgent procedural step in the main case.
Time limits in your original case remain important
A dispute with the insurer does not automatically stop the clock in the main case. A time limit may be running to challenge a dismissal, lodge an appeal, file an objection or interrupt the limitation period for a claim. Ask explicitly who is responsible for that time limit and what action will be taken before the final date.
Report a writ of summons, letter from the court or deadline immediately. Do not wait until the assessor has been appointed. If the insurer does not want to take a protective step, urgent advice on the underlying case is needed. A later complaint about how the case was handled does not automatically remedy a missed limitation period for forfeiture.
A proper handover therefore always states the procedural status and the next deadline. Also have it recorded which work the previous case handler will still complete and which the new lawyer will take over. This prevents each party from assuming that the other is responsible.
Recoverability and an insolvent opposing party
A legally strong claim is not always recoverable. The case handler may therefore advise against proceedings because the opposing party has no assets or is bankrupt. Ask whether the disagreement concerns the legal prospects, the prospects of recovery or a separate policy restriction. Those questions must remain recognisable in the instruction to the independent assessor.
Check whether relevant information about securities, other liable parties or an insurance policy has been taken into account. A general assumption that someone cannot pay is something different from a well-founded investigation into recoverability. A favourable opinion on the claim does not automatically oblige the insurer to take every conceivable further step.
The question determines what is assessed
Set the case handler’s position, your objection and the decisive documents side by side. Ask, for example, whether the available evidence justifies proceedings concerning a clearly defined claim. A question about your satisfaction that is too general provides less to go on. After an unfavourable outcome, check exactly which question was answered and whether there really are new facts; there is no automatic unlimited right to repeated opinions.
Frequently asked questions
Is the disputes procedure the same as a complaint
No. It deals with a substantive disagreement about the approach or the prospects within its scope. A complaint may, in addition, concern cover, communication or a handling error. The right route depends on the specific reason for your objection.
May I choose the assessor myself
That depends on the appointment procedure. Check it before you give an instruction. A suitable lawyer must also be able to act independently. Your own advisory instruction is not automatically a formal assessment under the policy.
Does a positive opinion mean that Arslan gets the case
Not automatically. Follow-up handling, free choice of lawyer and any exclusion of the assessor must be examined separately. Indicate at the intake that a takeover is your goal, so that the choice of role can be tailored accordingly.
Can I have the outcome reassessed
A binding opinion is not reassessed merely because you disagree with it. Serious defects or substantially new information may call for a different assessment. Have it examined specifically which next step is appropriate and which time limit applies.
Can I cancel my legal expenses insurance
That is a different decision from transferring your file. A new insurance policy does not automatically take over an existing conflict. Check the consequences for ongoing cases before you terminate your policy.
What should I send for an initial assessment
Send the policy schedule, the conditions, the case handler’s reasoned position and a short description of your objection. Mention any ongoing proceedings and the next deadline. It can then be determined in a targeted way which additional documents from the file are needed.
Have your route and file assessed
Arslan Advocaten can assess whether your problem concerns cover, the disputes procedure, free choice of lawyer or a possible handling error. If you want us to take over your case, we will also examine the role restrictions, the funding and the requirements for a transfer. You will be given clarity in advance about the instruction we can accept.
Contact us about your legal expenses insurance file. State the name of the insurer and the provider handling the claim, the reason for the refusal and any deadline. Also read our explanation of free choice of lawyer and transferring your file.
Sources for publication: Kifid on the disputes procedure, the specific ARAG procedure, Kifid rules and Financial Supervision Act, Article 4:68. Also check the policy version of the product concerned.
Read also
This page provides general information and does not constitute legal advice about your own situation. No rights can be derived from its content.
