“You signed the contract, you have to pay the full amount even if you don’t continue.” Almost everyone who leaves a course hears this sentence; then, they often find themselves facing enforcement proceedings. However, established judicial practice and Ministry of National Education regulations state the exact opposite: The course participant, as a rule, is indebted only for the service actually received and a limited deduction. In this article, we discuss how fee refunds are calculated, why “no refund” clauses in contracts are often invalid, the fate of promissory notes given, and the path to follow when faced with enforcement proceedings.
Short Summary
Education service is a consumer transaction; in disputes, Law No. 6502 on Consumer Protection and the Ministry of National Education Private Education Institutions Regulation are applied together.
According to Article 56 of the Regulation, the deduction is; limited to 10% of the annual fee + the cost of the days/lesson hours actually attended. The rest is refunded.
Clauses such as “Pays the full amount even if they don’t continue” are invalid as an unfair term if not negotiated (Consumer Protection Law Article 5); the institution proves that it was negotiated.
In consumer transactions, a promissory note must be issued to a named person and separately for each installment; otherwise, the promissory note is invalid from the consumer’s perspective (Consumer Protection Law Article 4/5).
If the amount paid exceeds the amount owed, the refund (reimbursement) of the difference can be requested.
1. Which Legislation Applies and Where to Apply?
Since language course, preparatory school, study center, or private school contracts are services acquired for personal needs, they qualify as a consumer transaction. Therefore, Law No. 6502 on Consumer Protection applies to disputes, and Consumer Courts are authorized. For disputes below the monetary threshold, an initial application must be made to the Consumer Arbitration Committee.
However, there is an important point emphasized by judicial decisions: In such disputes, not only general consumer legislation but also sector-specific regulations must be considered. When calculating fee refunds, courts rely on the provisions of the Ministry of National Education (MEB) Private Education Institutions Regulation, which is based on Private Education Institutions Law No. 5580. In other words, the calculation is made according to the Regulation, not according to the institution’s own contract.
2. Basic Rule: You Are Only Indebted for the Service You Received
It is unlawful to hold the course participant responsible for the fee of a period they did not utilize. Initiating enforcement proceedings for an unrendered service is also considered unjust. If the contract fee covers 12 months of education but the participant leaves in the 4th month, the fee for the remaining 8 months cannot generally be claimed. The right retained by the institution consists of a limited deduction.
3. Calculation: Regulation Art. 56 and the “10% Rule”
Article 56 of the MEB Private Education Institutions Regulation, titled “Refund of Fees,” outlines the framework for refund calculations:
“The portion of the annual fee, excluding ten percent, is refunded to those who withdraw before the academic year begins. For those who withdraw after the academic year has started, the portion of the annual fee, excluding ten percent and the amount calculated based on the days of study, is refunded.”
From this, two clear conclusions emerge:
Withdrawal before studies begin: Only 10% of the annual fee is withheld; the remaining 90% is refunded. Since no classes have been taken yet, an additional “tuition fee” deduction is not made.
Withdrawal after studies begin: 10% of the annual fee + the fee corresponding to the actual duration of study is withheld; the remaining portion is refunded.
An important detail regarding courses: If the fee is determined on a per-lesson-hour basis, the calculation is made based on the actual lesson hours taken instead of days. Furthermore, the fee to be charged from a student or course participant who withdraws after starting studies can in no case exceed the tuition fee determined by the contract.
Supreme Court 13th Civil Chamber, E. 2017/8224, K. 2018/9262, T. 10.10.2018In the decision, it was stated that, in accordance with the provision of Article 56 of the Regulation, only the relevant percentage should be deducted from the paid fee and a decision should be made for the refund of the remaining portion; and that rendering a contrary judgment was erroneous and necessitated reversal.
Example calculation: Let’s assume a course participant who registered for a language course with an annual contract fee of 85,000 TL withdrew after completing approximately one-third of the training (e.g., 4 out of 12 months) and had paid 44,429 TL by that day.
10% deduction: 85,000 × 0.10 = 8,500 TL
Service fee actually received (4/12): 85,000 × 4/12 ≈ 28,333 TL
Total debt: ≈ 36,833 TL
Paid: 44,429 TL → A refund (restitution) claim of ≈ 7,596 TL arises in favor of the trainee.
In this scenario, the institution does not have the right to demand the remaining balance (e.g., 41,000 TL); on the contrary, the institution becomes liable for a refund. The figures are examples; the actual calculation is made according to the contract price, the fee based on daily/hourly lessons, and the actual date of withdrawal.
4. “No Refund” Clauses in the Contract: Review of Unfair Terms
Clauses frequently included in course contracts, such as “the trainee agrees to pay the full fee even if they do not attend classes” and “no refunds will be made under any circumstances,” are subject to review under consumer legislation. Article 5 of Law No. 6502 defines an unfair term as follows:
“An unfair term is a contract term included in the contract without being negotiated with the consumer, and which, contrary to the requirement of good faith, causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.”
Such clauses, included in standard (pre-printed, boilerplate) contracts where the consumer is not given the opportunity to negotiate, are considered invalid to the extent that they create a significant imbalance to the detriment of the consumer, and are not binding on the consumer. Moreover, the burden of proof is not on the consumer: the institution that drafted the contract is obliged to prove that the relevant term was genuinely negotiated with the consumer. The defense of “You signed it” is not sufficient on its own.
Furthermore, during the contract period, the service provider cannot unilaterally change the terms to the detriment of the consumer (for example, fundamentally changing the branch/instructor/lesson hour schedule, or narrowing the committed content). In such a case, the consumer may terminate the contract for a just cause.
5. Defective Service and Withdrawal for Just Cause
Two situations further strengthen the trainee’s position:
Defective service: A service is defective if it does not meet the standard promised in the contract or objectively expected (for example, if the promised level/instructor/program is not provided). The consumer may exercise their optional rights, including withdrawal from the contract and refund of payment, in accordance with the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law regarding defective services.
Withdrawal for just cause: In cases such as a health problem, intra-provincial/inter-provincial transfer, or an official document proving that the trainee or their guardian is unable to continue the training, the refund of fees paid for the period after the withdrawal date comes into question. In such situations, documentation (report, assignment/transfer letter, etc.) is determinative.
6. What Happens to the Promissory Notes Issued? (CPL art. 4/5)
Courses usually take promissory notes (bono) for installments during registration. The legal status of these notes is discussed on two separate grounds:
a) Formal control: Registered and separate for each installment
Law no. 6502, article 4/5 introduces a mandatory rule:
“Due to the transactions made by the consumer, bills of exchange (promissory notes) can only be drawn as registered (nama yazılı) and separately for each installment payment, having the nature of valuable papers. Bills of exchange drawn contrary to the provisions of this paragraph are invalid from the consumer’s perspective.”
In practice, institutions often use printed promissory notes that are “to order” or take a single note for the entire debt. Both of these situations are contrary to the aforementioned imperative provision, and the note becomes invalid from the consumer’s perspective. This is one of the strongest defense mechanisms against enforcement proceedings.
b) Connection with the underlying relationship: Weakening of the principle of abstraction
As a rule, bills of exchange are “abstract”; that is, they are independent of the reason for their issuance. However, in bills of exchange given in return for educational services and as part of the contract, this abstraction weakens in terms of the underlying relationship between the parties (education contract). If the service has not been provided at all or has been partially provided, the bill of exchange for which there is no consideration becomes gratuitous and enforcement proceedings based on this bill are deemed unjust.
7. If You Encounter Enforcement Proceedings: The Path to Follow
It is common for the institution to initiate enforcement proceedings for the remaining balance. In this situation, deadlines are critical:
Objection period: An objection must be filed within the legal period from the notification of the payment order (5 days in enforcement specific to bills of exchange, 7 days in enforcement without judgment). If the deadline is missed, the proceedings become final, and rights are lost even if one is justified.
Action for negative declaratory judgment / restitution: An action can be filed to determine that one is not indebted or to reclaim an overpaid amount.
Counterclaim: If the amount paid exceeds the total of the 10% deduction + the service fee actually received, the refund of the difference may be requested separately.
8. Summary Table: Rights and Calculation Parameters
| Parameter | Legal Assessment |
|---|---|
| Primary liability | Limited to the cost of actually received lesson days/hours + 10% of the annual fee. |
| Claim for remaining balance | As a rule, the cost of an unrendered service cannot be claimed. |
| “No refund” clause | If not negotiated, it is an unfair term, hence invalid; the burden of proof lies with the institution. |
| Unilateral change | Changes cannot be made to the detriment of the consumer; it gives the consumer the right to justified termination. |
| Promissory notes | If not registered in a specific name and not issued separately for each installment, it is invalid for the consumer; if there is no service in return, it becomes gratuitous. |
| Defective service | If it is not up to the promised standard, withdrawal from the contract and refund of the fee become relevant. |
| Termination for a just cause | In documented cases such as health, relocation, etc., payments for the subsequent period are refunded. |
| Overpayment | The refund (reclamation) of the amount exceeding the indebtedness can be requested. |
Practical steps:
Notify the institution of your intention to withdraw in writing (preferably via notary public notice or registered mail with return receipt); also request the return of the promissory notes.
Keep the contract, payment documents, attendance/absence records, and copies of promissory notes.
According to Regulation Art. 56, calculate your own cost: 10% + service actually received.
If enforcement proceedings are initiated, object within the deadline and, if necessary, pursue a negative declaratory action/action for restitution.
Apply to the Consumer Arbitration Committee or the Consumer Court, depending on the monetary limit.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
I dropped out of the course, do I have to pay all remaining installments?
As a rule, no. According to Regulation Art. 56, your liability is limited to 10% of the annual fee plus the amount corresponding to the days/class hours you actually attended. The institution does not have the right to demand payment for services you never received.
The contract states “no refunds”; is this valid?
Such clauses, if included in a standard form contract without negotiation with the consumer and creating an imbalance to the consumer’s detriment, constitute an unfair term within the meaning of Article 5 of Law No. 6502 and are invalid. The burden of proving that the term was negotiated rests with the institution that prepared the contract.
What happens to the promissory notes I gave to the course?
In consumer transactions, promissory notes must be nominative (payable to a named person) and issued separately for each installment; notes contrary to this (e.g., printed promissory notes payable to order or a single note) are invalid for the consumer. Furthermore, if no service has been rendered in return, the note becomes without consideration, and any enforcement based on such a note is unlawful.
If the amount I paid is more than the calculated debt, can I get a refund?
Yes. If the total actual service fee received, with a 10% deduction, is less than the amount you paid, you can claim a refund (restitution) for the difference. This claim can also be put forward as a counterclaim in the lawsuit to be filed.
Where should I apply: to the arbitration committee or the court?
Since educational services constitute a consumer transaction, Consumer Courts are competent in disputes. However, if the dispute amount is below the monetary limit determined for the relevant year, an application must first be made to the Consumer Arbitration Committee.
Resources and Our Related Articles
Official sources: Law on Consumer Protection No. 6502 (mevzuat.gov.tr) · Ministry of National Education Private Education Institutions Regulation
Other articles related to consumer rights:
What are the Buyer’s Rights in a Defective Product in Light of Court Decisions?
Beauty Service Grievances: Right to Refund and Compensation
Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?
In course and private education disputes, there are three things that determine the outcome: the calculation being made in accordance with the Regulation, unfair terms in the contract being properly invoked, and not missing deadlines. Failure to object to the payment order in due time can even lead a rightful consumer to become a debtor. Furthermore, the formal inspection of promissory notes (payee-specific, separate arrangement per installment) is a technical matter that can alone change the outcome in many cases.
2M Hukuk Law Office provides support to consumers and institutions along the Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe and Gebze/Kocaeli line in consumer law, defective service, unfair terms, and objection to enforcement proceedings/negative declaratory action processes. For an evaluation regarding your specific case: 2mhukuk.com
This article is for general informational purposes only; it does not constitute legal advice or legal services. Each dispute should be evaluated under its unique circumstances.
