Requesting and sharing medical records in an injury claim
Human legal and translation review is still pending.
You want to know which medical records exist and which must be shared for your claim. These are separate questions. Access to your own file provides an overview; disclosure to others needs a purpose and suitable route. This guide helps limit requests, organise documents and raise factual errors. Health records should not end up in public forms or an indiscriminate collection of email attachments.
In this guide
- First identify the healthcare providers involved
- How to request access or copies
- Check content before drawing conclusions
- Request correction or addition of your own statement
- Read authorisation for purpose and scope
- Keep a simple transmission list
- Take particular care with relatives’ and children’s data
- Turn missing information into a targeted follow-up
First identify the healthcare providers involved
List your GP, hospital departments and other treating professionals. Note relevant periods and subjects without including full health details in the contact list. One patient portal does not necessarily contain other institutions’ records. This inventory helps identify where a letter, result or treatment was recorded instead of assuming one complete download contains everything.
Ask your representative what the current stage needs. You may want a personal overview before deciding what reaches a medical adviser. Make that distinction explicit. A personal copy request need not immediately include broad authority for a third party. Keep your records carefully and then discuss selection for the actual investigation question.
How to request access or copies
The Dutch government explains your right to inspect records and obtain a copy from the doctor or institution. Specify the period and documents when requesting only part. Use the provider’s official route and check the destination of online requests. A search result does not justify sending identity information to an unknown address.
Keep request date and acknowledgment. Ask how records will arrive and what identification is needed. A copy is not removal of the original healthcare record. Consult current government and institution information about costs, handling and exceptions. Track received and missing items to avoid repeatedly requesting identical material.
Check content before drawing conclusions
Medical records include your reports, findings, working diagnoses, referrals and plans. Not every sentence is final. Request explanation if the distinction is unclear. Abbreviations and provisional descriptions can mislead without context. Ask healthcare professionals about medical meaning and your representative about legal questions separately.
Start with straightforward facts: mistaken identity, dates, incident and work description. Check whether the selection covers the requested period. Missing material in a download does not automatically mean treatment was unrecorded. Ask specifically. Preserve originals as received so later advice and responses can be traced to the information used.
Request correction or addition of your own statement
Government information explains that inaccurate or incomplete data can be raised with the doctor or institution. Identify the passage, explain the error and provide supporting documents where available. A wrong treatment date differs from disagreement with diagnosis. Keep requests factual and limited so the expected response is clear.
You can also request addition of your own statement when disagreeing with diagnosis. That does not automatically replace professional judgment. Ask how the response is recorded and keep correspondence. Do not silently change your own copy as though you were the institution; this obscures the version used in later examination.
Read authorisation for purpose and scope
An insurance medical adviser may need targeted information. KNMG describes explicit consent and restriction to relevant factual data. Check authorised requesters, named providers and period. Ask for explanation where all data is sought without the question it answers. Broad authorisation needs more explanation than a clearly limited request.
Discuss the appropriate information route with your representative. Ask whether a practical request is directed to you or whether a clinician must provide records directly. This distinction can matter to professional confidentiality and the doctor’s role. Do not sign merely to clear a reminder email. A short question about unclear scope can prevent considerable unnecessary disclosure later.
Keep a simple transmission list
Once focused disclosure is agreed, record date, recipient, purpose and filenames. Do not repeat medical content in general shared administration. Check the correct version and address. Watch attachments in old email threads: an earlier recipient may not be the right reader for a new letter.
Where possible use the agreed secure route and seek confirmation for important transfers. Our tools request no uploads and send no entered data. They do not replace secure medical portals. If papers reach a wrong recipient, promptly discuss this with the responsible organisation and representative so appropriate next steps can be assessed.
Take particular care with relatives’ and children’s data
A record may include information about others. Government guidance identifies third-party privacy as a possible restriction on particular passages. Missing content may therefore need a privacy explanation rather than the conclusion that the whole request was ignored. Ask what was withheld and why, without further distributing third-party details.
For children or someone unable to decide independently, establish who may request records and the consent needed. Do not rely solely on who normally manages appointments or pays premiums. Ask the institution and, where necessary, a legal adviser to explain the proper route. Medical access and authority to settle a claim are different issues too.
Turn missing information into a targeted follow-up
After receipt identify the unanswered question: missing test result, uncertain date or another period requested by the adviser. Send a short addition referring to the original request. This keeps correspondence organised. Starting a complete new request for every ambiguity can create duplication and conflicting versions.
Ask what legal steps cannot wait meanwhile. An ongoing records request does not automatically protect the injury claim from limitation. Agree responsibility for cost and progress. The evidence check identifies missing categories without health details. Its result is a discussion list, not confirmation of medical completeness or proven entitlement.
Frequently asked questions
Can I request copies without starting an injury claim?
Yes. Access and copying are independent of a claim. Use your provider’s procedure. Later sharing in a claim requires its own assessment and appropriate arrangements.
May I delete a wrong diagnosis from the PDF myself?
Do not change an original as though it remains the original version. Ask for explanation, correction or addition of your statement. Retain versions and correspondence so the data’s origin stays traceable.
Must my whole medical history go to the insurer?
That is not an automatic starting point. Ask about the investigation issue and relevant period. Discuss wide authorisation with representation or medical advice and share relevant records through the agreed route.
What if an institution does not answer?
Check receipt and procedure, refer to request date and description and seek a substantive answer. Consult current government access guidance. Discuss persistent problems and further steps with the institution or adviser.
Must I pay for the first copy or explain my claim?
Rijksoverheid states that you are entitled to one free copy and need not give a reason for requesting it. The provider may ask for identification. A reasonable administrative charge may apply to a second copy. Use the provider's official request route.
Sources for this article
This information concerns Dutch law. Consult the source for current guidance and seek advice about your own situation if you are unsure.
Dutch government: copies of medical recordsDutch government: correcting medical recordsDutch government: inspecting medical recordsKNMG: information for an insurer’s medical adviserGeneral information. This does not replace individual legal advice.
Back to the knowledge baseLegal review
Not legally reviewed yetThis version has not been reviewed by a lawyer or legal professional. Checking sources or editing text is not legal approval.
Editorial team Letselschade in Nederland
We connect explanations to sources and record targeted changes. Legal review is attributed only to the actual reviewed version, with a real reviewer, date and scope. Human legal review of these articles remains open.
Ricardo van der Spoel
Editorial responsibility · Editorial organisation and technology