Legal Remedies When a Foreign Patient Pays for a Treatment Package in Turkey but the Treatment Is Not Completed

A foreign patient contacts a Turkish clinic after seeing an advertisement on Instagram.

The clinic offers an all-inclusive package:

“20 zirconium crowns + implants + hotel + airport transfer + medication: EUR 12,000.”

The patient pays the entire price before travelling to Turkey.

However, after arriving in Istanbul, only part of the treatment is performed.

Perhaps only ten teeth are treated. The implants are inserted but the permanent crowns are never fitted. The patient is told to return months later, but when he contacts the clinic again, nobody answers. In another case, the clinic demands an additional EUR 8,000 before completing treatment even though the original package was advertised as “all inclusive.”

Another common scenario concerns cosmetic surgery, hair transplantation, bariatric treatment or fertility treatment: the patient prepays for a complete treatment plan, but the healthcare provider performs only the first stage and refuses or becomes unable to complete the remainder.

The obvious question is:

Can the foreign patient recover the money paid for the unperformed treatment and claim compensation in Turkey?

In many cases, the answer is yes.

Under Turkish law, taking payment for a defined treatment package and then failing to provide the agreed services may constitute:

• breach of contract;
• defective or incomplete performance;
• an unfair consumer practice;
• unjustified retention of payment;
• a violation of international health-tourism regulations; and, in appropriate circumstances,
• a basis for material and moral damages.

However, an important distinction must be made.

Not every incomplete treatment automatically means that the clinic is legally at fault.

The reason why the treatment was not completed is often decisive.

1. Foreign Patients Are Specifically Protected by Turkey’s Health-Tourism Regulations

Turkey introduced a substantially renewed regulatory regime through the Regulation on International Health Tourism and Tourist Health, published in the Official Gazette on 26 April 2025.

The Regulation applies to individuals who come to Turkey from abroad temporarily for the purpose of receiving healthcare and to the healthcare institutions and intermediary organisations serving them.

This means that a British, German, French, Dutch, Saudi, American or other foreign patient travelling to Turkey specifically for:

• dental implants;
• cosmetic dentistry;
• rhinoplasty;
• breast surgery;
• hair transplantation;
• bariatric surgery;
• ophthalmological treatment;
• orthopaedic treatment;
• IVF;
• aesthetic surgery; or
• another healthcare service

may fall directly within Turkey’s specialised international health-tourism regime.

The fact that the patient is not a Turkish citizen does not remove the provider’s contractual or regulatory obligations.

2. The Healthcare Provider Cannot Simply Take a “Package Fee” Without Defining What It Covers

Health-tourism disputes frequently begin with vague package terminology.

Clinics often advertise:

“Hollywood Smile Package – EUR 8,000”

or:

“All-Inclusive Hair Transplant Package – EUR 3,500.”

But legally, the expression “package” is not enough.

The real question is:

What exactly did the clinic undertake to provide in return for the payment?

The answer may have to be reconstructed from:

• written quotations;
• treatment plans;
• invoices;
• WhatsApp correspondence;
• emails;
• website advertisements;
• Instagram advertisements;
• medical consultation records;
• payment links;
• credit-card records;
• hotel reservations;
• intermediary agreements; and
• pre-treatment photographs.

For example, if a EUR 15,000 dental package was represented as including:

• 6 implants;
• 20 zirconium crowns;
• temporary teeth;
• permanent prostheses;
• examinations;
• X-rays;
• medication;
• airport transfers; and
• hotel accommodation,

the clinic cannot ordinarily treat completion of only six implants as full contractual performance.

The entire package must be examined.

3. Incomplete Treatment Can Constitute a Defective Service Under Turkish Consumer Law

Article 13 of Consumer Protection Law No. 6502 defines a defective service broadly.

A service may be defective where it:

• does not commence within the agreed period;
• does not possess the characteristics agreed between the parties; or
• contains deficiencies that reduce or eliminate the benefit reasonably expected by the consumer.

The legislation expressly takes into account characteristics stated by the provider in advertisements, websites and promotional materials.

Therefore, a healthcare package advertised and sold as a complete treatment may constitute a defective service if substantial components are never provided.

Article 14 also places the primary obligation directly on the provider:

the provider must perform the service in accordance with the contract.

This principle can be extremely important in health-tourism disputes.

A clinic cannot ordinarily retain the entire package price while simply saying:

“We performed some treatment.”

The legal question is not merely whether something was performed.

It is whether the service purchased by the patient was performed as agreed.

4. What Can the Foreign Patient Demand?

Article 15 of Consumer Protection Law No. 6502 provides several alternative remedies for defective services.

Depending on the circumstances, a consumer may request:

• performance of the service again;
• rectification of the defective result;
• a proportional reduction in the price; or
• withdrawal from the contract.

The consumer may also claim damages under the Turkish Code of Obligations.

This gives foreign patients several possible strategies.

5. Refund of the Unperformed Portion of the Package

The most straightforward claim is frequently:

refund the price corresponding to the treatment that was never provided.

Suppose a patient paid EUR 12,000 for:

• 4 implants: EUR 4,000;
• 20 crowns: EUR 6,000;
• temporary prosthesis: EUR 1,000;
• additional services: EUR 1,000.

If the implants were performed but the crowns were never provided, the clinic may potentially be required to refund the amount attributable to the incomplete part of the treatment.

The calculation does not necessarily depend solely on the provider’s internal price list.

A court may examine:

• the original quotation;
• market prices;
• invoices;
• treatment records;
• expert evidence; and
• the relative economic value of the performed and unperformed services.

This is why an itemised package becomes extremely important.

6. Can the Patient Demand the Entire Package Price Back?

Sometimes, yes.

But not automatically.

The distinction depends largely on whether the partial treatment still has independent value for the patient.

For example, suppose a patient pays EUR 10,000 for a complete dental restoration.

The clinic prepares the patient’s teeth extensively, removes existing crowns and performs irreversible procedures but then abandons the treatment without supplying the final prosthetic work.

The patient may subsequently need another dentist to remove or redo much of what was performed.

In that situation, merely calculating:

“Half the procedures were performed, therefore only half the money can be refunded”

may produce an unjust result.

If the incomplete or defective treatment defeats the fundamental purpose of the contract, withdrawal from the contract and a broader refund claim may become legally arguable.

Consumer Protection Law expressly recognises withdrawal from the contract as one of the remedies for defective services. Where withdrawal is validly exercised, the legislation provides for the return of the amount paid.

The court must therefore consider the treatment as a functional whole, rather than merely counting how many procedures were performed.

7. Example: Implants Were Inserted but the Final Crowns Were Never Provided

This is one of the most common international dental-tourism disputes.

A patient travels from the United Kingdom to Istanbul.

He pays EUR 14,000 in advance.

The package includes:

• extractions;
• 8 dental implants;
• temporary prostheses;
• 24 zirconium crowns;
• permanent implant-supported teeth; and
• follow-up treatment.

During the first visit, the dentist performs the extractions and places the implants.

The patient returns home.

The clinic tells him to come back four months later for completion.

When he tries to schedule the second visit:

• the clinic stops responding;
• the doctor has left;
• the clinic has changed ownership; or
• an additional EUR 7,000 is requested.

The clinic then argues:

“The implants were already performed, so there can be no refund.”

That defence does not necessarily resolve the dispute.

The patient did not purchase only implant placement.

He purchased a completed dental rehabilitation package.

The court should therefore determine:

1. What was contractually promised?
2. Which procedures were actually completed?
3. Can the completed procedures be safely used by another dentist?
4. Must any procedures be repeated?
5. What is the value of the unperformed work?
6. What will completion now cost elsewhere?

Those findings can substantially affect the amount recoverable.

8. The Patient May Also Recover the Cost of Completing Treatment Elsewhere

The patient’s claim may extend beyond reimbursement of the unused package price.

Suppose the clinic retains EUR 5,000 attributable to unfinished treatment.

The patient then receives quotations in London showing that completing the treatment will cost GBP 9,000.

A damages claim may potentially include the reasonable additional costs caused by the breach.

Depending on causation and proof, recoverable losses may include:

• corrective treatment;
• completion treatment;
• additional surgery;
• replacement implants;
• new crowns;
• medication;
• diagnostic examinations;
• flights;
• accommodation;
• airport transfers;
• loss of earnings; and
• other necessary expenses.

The crucial question is causation:

Would the patient have incurred this expense if the Turkish provider had properly completed the original treatment?

9. Additional Flights and Hotel Costs May Become Part of the Claim

Health-tourism cases differ from ordinary domestic healthcare disputes because the patient may live thousands of kilometres away.

If a clinic’s breach forces a patient to return to Turkey unexpectedly, the resulting travel costs may become economically significant.

For example:

• return flight: EUR 650;
• hotel: EUR 800;
• local transportation: EUR 150;
• missed work: EUR 1,200;
• additional medical consultation: EUR 500.

If those expenses are a direct and foreseeable consequence of the provider’s failure to complete or correctly perform treatment, they may potentially be included in a material-damages claim.

Receipts should therefore be preserved.

10. What If the Patient Cannot Return to Turkey?

A clinic sometimes argues:

“The treatment is available. The patient simply needs to return to Turkey.”

That argument must be examined carefully.

If the original agreement clearly required two visits and the patient was informed of this from the beginning, the patient’s refusal to return may weaken a claim based solely on non-completion.

However, the position may be different if:

• the clinic originally promised one visit;
• the additional trip became necessary because of the clinic’s error;
• the treating doctor disappeared;
• the clinic changed the treatment plan after payment;
• the patient reasonably lost confidence because of serious complications;
• the clinic demanded additional payment inconsistent with the agreement; or
• returning would expose the patient to an unreasonable medical risk.

The reason for non-completion is therefore decisive.

11. What If Treatment Was Stopped for Medical Reasons?

This is one of the most important distinctions.

A healthcare provider is not obliged to continue medically inappropriate treatment merely because the patient has prepaid.

Suppose tests reveal that:

• the patient does not have sufficient bone for an implant;
• anaesthesia would create an unacceptable risk;
• serious infection develops;
• cardiac findings make surgery unsafe; or
• continuation of treatment would violate medical standards.

The provider may be medically required to stop.

In such circumstances, non-completion does not automatically constitute malpractice or contractual breach.

However, a separate financial question remains:

Can the provider keep the money for procedures that were never performed?

Ordinarily, the clinic should be able to identify:

• services already performed;
• materials actually used;
• costs properly incurred; and
• the unperformed portion of the package.

Unless there is a valid contractual and legal basis for retaining the balance, keeping the entire package price despite medically justified cancellation may still become disputable.

Medical justification for stopping treatment and financial entitlement to retain payment are two separate questions.

12. What If the Patient Voluntarily Abandons Treatment?

The legal analysis changes again if the patient himself terminates treatment without a justified reason.

For example:

A patient purchases a two-stage implant package and is clearly informed that the second stage must be performed six months later.

After the first treatment, the patient decides that he no longer wishes to return to Turkey.

In that case, the clinic may have stronger grounds to retain:

• the value of services already rendered;
• materials specifically purchased or used;
• reasonable contractual costs; and
• other legally recoverable expenses.

But even then, a clause providing:

“No refunds under any circumstances”

should not automatically be assumed to allow the clinic to keep the entire price irrespective of the services actually provided.

Consumer-law scrutiny may still apply to disproportionate contractual clauses and retention of prepaid amounts.

13. “Non-Refundable Package” Does Not Automatically Mean the Clinic Wins

Health-tourism contracts frequently contain wording such as:

• “All payments are non-refundable.”
• “Deposits cannot be returned.”
• “Cancellation results in loss of the full package amount.”
• “Clinic is not responsible if treatment is incomplete.”
• “No refund will be issued after treatment begins.”

Such clauses are not necessarily decisive.

Mandatory consumer-protection principles cannot simply be eliminated through standard terms drafted by the provider.

A healthcare provider generally cannot contractually transform payment for an unperformed service into an unconditional financial entitlement merely by inserting the words “non-refundable.”

The validity and application of such a clause must be examined in light of:

• the reason treatment was not completed;
• the amount of treatment actually performed;
• the transparency of the clause;
• whether the patient was individually informed;
• whether the term creates an unreasonable imbalance; and
• mandatory consumer law.

14. What If the Clinic Demands More Money Halfway Through Treatment?

Another common dispute involves additional charges.

The foreign patient initially receives a package price of EUR 8,000.

After irreversible treatment begins, the clinic announces:

“You now need additional procedures. You must pay another EUR 5,000 or we will not continue.”

This situation requires careful examination.

Additional costs may be legitimate where genuinely unforeseen medical circumstances require additional treatment.

For example, surgery may reveal a medical issue that could not reasonably have been detected earlier.

But additional charges become far more problematic where:

• the treatment was already included in the package;
• the clinic knew about the issue before quoting;
• the package was deliberately underpriced to attract the patient;
• essential components were misleadingly described as optional;
• the clinic refuses to explain the new charges; or
• the patient is effectively placed under economic pressure after irreversible procedures have begun.

In such cases, contractual, consumer-law and potentially regulatory remedies should be considered.

15. The 2025 Health-Tourism Regulation Strengthens Accountability

The current international health-tourism framework requires authorised healthcare institutions and intermediary organisations to operate within a regulated structure.

Importantly, the 2025 Regulation expressly states that the healthcare facility and intermediary organisation are responsible, according to the type of service they provide, for health and intermediary services supplied while the international health tourist is in Turkey. The Regulation also expressly includes complications and medical malpractice arising following healthcare services within the relevant responsibility framework.

The Regulation further requires international health-tourism facilities to maintain a dedicated unit dealing with matters including:

• patient admission;
• registration;
• diagnosis;
• treatment;
• billing;
• discharge;
• translation; and
• coordination with intermediary organisations.

A clinic handling international patients is therefore not operating in a regulatory vacuum.

16. Who Is Responsible When the Patient Paid a Health-Tourism Agency?

This is a particularly important issue.

The patient may never have paid the hospital directly.

Instead:

1. a health-tourism intermediary advertises the package abroad;
2. the patient pays EUR 15,000 to the intermediary;
3. the intermediary arranges the Turkish clinic;
4. the treatment remains incomplete; and
5. each side blames the other.

The clinic says:

“You paid the agency.”

The agency says:

“The medical treatment was the clinic’s responsibility.”

The legal solution depends on the contractual structure and the service that each entity undertook.

The current 2025 Regulation expressly recognises differentiated responsibility between the healthcare institution and the intermediary according to the service supplied.

Therefore, the following must be investigated:

• Who issued the quotation?
• Who promised the treatment?
• Who collected the money?
• Who issued the invoice?
• Was the intermediary authorised?
• Was the clinic identified before payment?
• Did the intermediary sell its own package?
• Who selected the doctor?
• Who guaranteed follow-up treatment?
• Who communicated the treatment plan?

In appropriate cases, claims may need to be directed against more than one party.

17. Invoice and Treatment Records Are Critical

A foreign patient should request documents immediately after a dispute arises.

The documentary file should include:

• invoice or receipt;
• itemised treatment statement;
• treatment plan;
• patient file;
• medical reports;
• operation notes;
• radiological images;
• CT scans;
• laboratory results;
• implant serial numbers;
• prescriptions;
• informed-consent forms; and
• discharge documentation.

Documentation becomes especially important where a clinic argues that more treatment was performed than the patient accepts.

Earlier international health-tourism rules expressly required invoicing and detailed documentation of services, and the current regulatory system continues to place billing and patient-process coordination within the duties of the international health-tourism unit.

18. WhatsApp Messages May Be Some of the Strongest Evidence

Foreign patient arrangements are frequently negotiated almost entirely through WhatsApp.

A patient should preserve messages such as:

“The EUR 10,000 includes everything.”

“You only need to come to Turkey once.”

“Permanent crowns are included.”

“You will receive 24 zirconium teeth.”

“No additional payment will be required.”

“Hotel and transfers are included.”

Such messages may help establish the scope of the agreement.

The clinic’s own advertising may also be relevant because Consumer Protection Law takes account of characteristics communicated through websites, advertisements and announcements when determining whether a service is defective.

Screenshots should therefore include:

• account name;
• dates;
• URLs where possible;
• full conversation context; and
• original files.

19. Before-and-After Medical Evidence Should Be Obtained

The patient should also obtain an independent medical assessment.

For dental treatment this may include:

• panoramic X-rays;
• CT scans;
• photographs;
• periodontal examinations; and
• a written treatment-completion plan.

For cosmetic surgery:

• photographs;
• specialist examination;
• ultrasound or imaging where relevant; and
• corrective surgery proposals.

For hair transplantation:

• pre- and post-treatment photographs;
• graft data;
• donor-area examination; and
• specialist dermatological evaluation.

The purpose is to answer two different questions:

What part of the original package was never performed?

and:

What must now be done to place the patient in the position that proper performance would have produced?

20. Can the Patient Claim Moral Damages?

Potentially, but the claim must be distinguished from an ordinary refund dispute.

A simple disagreement concerning EUR 3,000 of an unperformed package will not automatically justify moral damages.

The case becomes stronger where incomplete treatment causes:

• permanent physical damage;
• severe pain;
• visible deformity;
• loss of teeth;
• inability to eat;
• prolonged inability to work;
• psychological suffering;
• repeated corrective operations; or
• serious interference with the patient’s bodily integrity.

In such circumstances, contractual remedies and compensation for bodily or personality-related harm may be pursued together where the legal requirements are satisfied.

21. Can a Foreign Patient Sue in Turkey?

The fact that the patient lives abroad does not mean that proceedings must necessarily be brought abroad.

Where the defendant clinic or healthcare provider is established in Turkey and the medical services were performed in Turkey, Turkish proceedings may be available.

Cross-border consumer disputes are additionally governed by the Turkish Private International Law and International Civil Procedure Act No. 5718.

Article 45 provides specific international jurisdiction rules for qualifying consumer contracts and expressly includes, in the circumstances covered by Article 26, Turkish courts connected with the other party’s place of business, residence or habitual residence among the possible competent courts.

The precise jurisdiction and applicable law should nevertheless be examined individually because:

• the contract may contain a choice-of-law clause;
• the patient may have contracted through an overseas intermediary;
• several companies may be involved; and
• consumer-contract rules may depend on how and where the contractual relationship was established.

A clause stating that only a foreign court has jurisdiction should therefore not automatically be treated as conclusive without a conflict-of-laws analysis.

22. Consumer Court and Mandatory Mediation

Where the relationship qualifies as a consumer transaction and proceedings are brought against a private healthcare provider, the dispute may generally fall within the consumer-law framework.

Consumer disputes exceeding the applicable Consumer Arbitration Committee threshold are typically litigated before the competent Consumer Court.

Before filing many consumer lawsuits, mandatory mediation must also be considered under Turkish law.

The procedural path should therefore normally be planned as:

evidence collection → formal demand → mandatory mediation where applicable → lawsuit.

23. A Formal Demand Should Be Sent Before Litigation

Before filing proceedings, a detailed formal demand can be highly effective.

The notice should identify:

1. the total price paid;
2. the agreed treatment package;
3. services actually performed;
4. services not performed;
5. medical problems created;
6. additional costs incurred;
7. the amount requested as refund;
8. compensation claimed; and
9. a deadline for payment.

Where appropriate, the notice should also request preservation of:

• medical records;
• CCTV records;
• patient-management system entries;
• payment records;
• internal treatment plans;
• communication records; and
• other electronic evidence.

For a foreign claimant, documenting the dispute before leaving Turkey or shortly after returning home can substantially strengthen later proceedings.

24. A Complaint to the Ministry of Health May Also Be Considered

Civil compensation proceedings and regulatory complaints serve different purposes.

A foreign patient can consider reporting serious health-tourism irregularities to the relevant Turkish health authorities.

The 2025 Regulation expressly requires healthcare facilities and intermediary organisations to evaluate complaints arising in the health-tourism field and to undertake corrective and preventive action and necessary improvements.

Regulatory concerns may be particularly serious where:

• the provider lacks the required authorisation;
• the intermediary is unauthorised;
• medical records are withheld;
• the advertised service materially differs from the treatment;
• serious patient-safety violations occurred; or
• repeated complaints indicate systemic misconduct.

However, a Ministry complaint does not automatically replace a civil action for repayment and damages.

25. Practical Example: EUR 18,000 Dental Package, Only Half Completed

Consider the following case.

A German patient purchases an EUR 18,000 full-mouth rehabilitation package in Istanbul.

The agreement includes:

• 8 implants;
• bone grafting;
• temporary teeth;
• 24 permanent zirconium crowns;
• three hotel stays; and
• transfers.

The patient pays EUR 18,000 in advance.

During the first trip, implants and temporary teeth are provided.

The patient is instructed to return five months later.

Before the second visit, the clinic states that it will not perform the permanent restoration unless the patient pays another EUR 9,000.

The patient refuses.

The clinic retains the full EUR 18,000.

Another dentist estimates that completion will cost EUR 13,000.

A proper damages analysis should not merely ask:

“How much did the first clinic spend?”

Instead, the following should be determined:

• what the EUR 18,000 package objectively covered;
• the value of the treatment completed;
• whether the completed implant treatment is usable;
• whether any work must be repeated;
• the value of the unperformed permanent treatment;
• the reasonable cost of completion elsewhere;
• additional travel expenses; and
• whether the demand for EUR 9,000 was contractually justified.

Depending on those findings, the patient may potentially pursue both a refund and additional damages.

26. Practical Example: Treatment Stopped Because Surgery Became Unsafe

Now consider a different case.

A British patient pays EUR 9,000 for a planned surgical package.

Pre-operative testing unexpectedly reveals a serious cardiac problem.

The anaesthesiologist determines that surgery would create an unacceptable risk.

The clinic cancels the operation.

In this situation, the clinic’s refusal to operate may be medically correct and legally necessary.

The patient ordinarily cannot argue:

“You committed malpractice because you refused to operate.”

But the financial account remains relevant.

If the clinic performed only:

• consultation;
• blood tests; and
• imaging,

it should be able to explain the legal basis for keeping the remainder of the EUR 9,000.

The provider’s medical right to cancel treatment does not automatically create a right to retain payment for every unperformed component.

27. Practical Example: Patient Refuses the Second Treatment Stage

The opposite result may arise where the treatment plan expressly requires two visits.

The patient is fully informed before payment.

The first stage is performed correctly.

The clinic remains ready to provide the second stage.

The patient simply changes his mind and refuses to travel.

Here, claiming the entire package price back may be considerably more difficult.

The court would examine:

• the patient’s reason for terminating;
• contractual cancellation provisions;
• work already performed;
• costs incurred by the clinic;
• materials purchased specifically for the patient; and
• whether retaining the remaining payment is proportionate.

Therefore, the factual reason for non-completion should never be ignored.

28. The Central Legal Question Is Not “Was Some Treatment Provided?”

Clinics defending these cases often focus on one fact:

“We treated the patient.”

That is usually not the complete legal question.

The correct analysis is:

What was promised?

What was paid?

What was actually delivered?

Why was the remaining treatment not delivered?

What does it now cost to complete or correct the treatment?

If a provider sells a complete health-tourism package, takes the entire price and then fails without adequate justification to deliver substantial elements of that package, Turkish law may provide the foreign patient with meaningful contractual and consumer remedies.

Conclusion: A Foreign Patient Does Not Lose the Right to a Refund Merely Because Treatment Started

Prepayment is common in Turkish health tourism.

But payment in advance does not mean that the money becomes unconditionally non-refundable the moment the patient enters the clinic.

Where treatment is incomplete, the legal assessment should distinguish between three scenarios.

First, the clinic unjustifiably fails or refuses to complete treatment.
This may constitute contractual breach and defective service and may support refund and damages claims.

Second, treatment is medically impossible or unsafe to continue.
The clinic may be justified in stopping treatment, but the parties must still determine what amount may lawfully be retained for services actually provided and expenses properly incurred.

Third, the patient voluntarily abandons treatment despite the clinic being ready and able to complete it.
The provider may have stronger arguments for retaining amounts connected with services performed and reasonable costs, although the enforceability of blanket “no refund” clauses should still be examined.

For foreign patients, the most important practical rule is therefore simple:

Do not analyse the case merely by asking how much treatment was performed. Analyse the package as a whole.

The decisive evidence will usually establish:

what was promised, what was paid, what was delivered, what remained unfinished, why it remained unfinished, and what the patient must now spend to obtain the treatment originally purchased.

Where those elements can be documented, a foreign patient who has paid for a complete treatment package but received only part of it may have a strong claim in Turkey for refund, completion or corrective treatment costs and, where legally justified, additional material and moral damages.