In motor insurance, an example occurs when the traffic police do not perform a complete damage assessment at the time of the claim. Later, the car’s engine or electrical system may be discovered to have been damaged in the same crash. The insurer may refuse to cover this extra damage because it was not identified in the initial claim. The owner may therefore have to arrange for a later claim or, in some jurisdictions, file a second, separate claim for the bijschade. Certain policy language explicitly excludes bijschade, requiring the insured to seek a new claim for any subsequent damage.
From a legal standpoint, bijschade is relevant to the doctrine of “prima facie evidence”. In Dutch law, the initial claim and the insurer’s acceptance of that claim create an evidential record. Any damage that arises of a different nature after that point is generally considered a separate incident. The insured or the policyholder may contest the insurer’s refusal to cover bijschade by showing that the damage is a direct consequence of the original event and that it was not discoverable at the time of the first claim.
The concept of bijschade also appears in property insurance, particularly for buildings and contents. If a structural problem such as water damage or mould develops later, the insurer may reject coverage unless the policy explicitly permits secondary damage to be included as bijschade. This principle provides a safeguard for insurers against claims that would be difficult to prove as part of the primary loss.