KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
If the Seller Cannot Be Reached in Marketplace and Social Media Shopping: Liability of the Platform and Fake Site Fraud The obligations of the intermediary service provider, the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 2026, bank objection and the path to be followed in case of suspicion of fraud have been updated as of 2026.
When there is a problem with the product purchased through the marketplace or social media, the first difficulty the consumer encounters is not being able to reach the seller and the platform denying responsibility. Law No. 6502 and Electronic Commerce Law No. 6563 impose obligations on the intermediary service provider to provide information, to introduce the seller, and in certain cases, to take responsibility. With its decision dated 12 February 2026 and numbered E.2024/187, K.2026/42 (OG 02.06.2026, 33268), the Constitutional Court annulled some regulations regarding the exemption of intermediary service providers from liability in consumer contracts. Cancellation provisions will enter into force nine months after the publication of the decision. As for fake shopping sites, the problem is fraud rather than contract dispute and requires a quick bank objection and a criminal complaint.
1. Who is the Intermediary Service Provider?
An intermediary service provider is a natural or legal person who provides an electronic commerce environment for the economic and commercial activities of others without providing goods or services himself. This includes large marketplaces, classifieds sites and platforms where sellers open stores. In cases where the platform itself sells the product or pretends to be a seller, the platform may be directly responsible for the seller.
This distinction is important for the consumer; because it determines who the claim will be directed to, the scope of the platform's liability and where the payment flow is.
Article 48 of Law No. 6502 regarding distance contracts imposes certain information and assistance obligations on the intermediary service provider. Article 9 of Law No. 6563 included a principle that intermediary service providers cannot be held responsible for the illegality of the product sold or service offered electronically. This framework paved the way for the platform to deny liability in cases where the consumer could not reach the seller.
6502 p. Law art.48/6-d The phrase containing the reference to Article 11 (defective goods) was deleted; Application rejected for lack of jurisdiction in respect of reference to Article 15 (defective service)
In its justification, the court stated that excluding intermediary service providers from liability for defective goods in consumer contracts may lead to the consumer being deprived of effective protection in cases where he cannot reach the seller. The decision was based on constitutional principles regarding property rights and consumer protection. In a dissenting vote from a member, it was argued that the current obligations of intermediary service providers provide sufficient consumer protection and that strict liability could increase costs. Since the effective date is nine months after publication, it is calculated to begin around March 2027, based on June 2026; The exact date should be checked from the legislation text.
3. What Can Be Requested from the Platform Today?
Identity and contact information of the seller, such as trade name, address, MERSİS and tax information.
Listing of order, payment and delivery records.
Following up the complaint submitted to the seller and initiating the dispute process on the platform.
Refund of the price if the payment is blocked when the seller cannot be reached.
Alleging direct liability of the platform in cases where it misleads the consumer or acts as a seller.
After the Constitutional Court decision comes into force, the consumer will be able to apply to the intermediary service provider regarding defective goods claims and will be able to assert the platform's liability more strongly. Therefore, the way the decision is implemented and new regulations must be followed.
Indicator Why is it risky?
Price well below market price Increases the chance that the product will not be shipped after payment is received
Accepting payment only by money order or EFT Payment is made without bank objection and platform assurance
Missing contact information, address, trade registry information The possibility of reaching the seller and taking legal action becomes weaker
Fake reviews and newly opened domain name The appearance of reliability is artificially created
Quick decision printing and sending a special payment link The risk of card information theft increases
Failure to knowingly send products via a fake site or social media account brings to the fore crimes of qualified fraud or misuse of card information in most cases. In these cases, consumer law application and criminal investigation should be carried out together.
Storage of evidence: Order page, screenshots, messages and receipts are taken as evidence.
Bank objection: An objection is made to the bank without delay on the grounds of lack of service or unauthorized transaction in payment by card.
Platform application: A dispute record is opened in the marketplace and the seller's identification information is requested.
Criminal complaint: If there is suspicion of fraud, an application is made to the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office.
Arbitral Tribunal or case: If the dispute value is below 186,000 TL (2026), the Consumer Arbitration Tribunal is authorized; if it is above, the Consumer Court is authorized after mediation.
The consumer opened a store in a marketplace, bought a product from a seller, and paid the price through the platform. The seller did not send the product and did not respond to messages. The platform stated that the responsibility belongs to the seller.
In the current regulation, the platform is obliged to share the seller's information and carry out the dispute process. If the payment is kept by the platform, the refund can be requested through the platform records. The approach of the Constitutional Court is that intermediary service providers should bear more responsibility in their relationship with the consumer. The consumer must make a written application with evidence, and if he cannot receive a response, he must go to the Arbitration Committee.
Who can I sue for the product purchased from the platform?
As a rule, the seller is responsible. The liability of the platform is evaluated according to the structure of the contract, the role of the platform and the new regulations that will come into force after the decision of the Constitutional Court.
Is the Constitutional Court decision implemented immediately?
Cancellation provisions shall enter into force nine months after the decision is published in the Official Gazette on 2 June 2026. Until then, existing regulations continue to apply.
If the social media seller does not send the product, where should the complaint be made?
Depending on the payment method, a bank objection, a complaint to the platform and a criminal complaint to the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office must be made together.
Does cash on delivery prevent fraud?
There is still a risk if the product is paid before it is opened; Payment should not be made without checking the contents of the package, and a cargo report should be kept.
Is there a deadline for a bank objection?
Bank contracts and card rules stipulate an objection period. It is necessary to apply without delay as soon as it is noticed.
Paying by money order for a product whose price is well below the market.
Shopping without checking the seller's identity and trade information.
Agreeing and making payments outside the platform and giving up platform assurance.
Deleting messaging and payment records.
Postponing the bank objection and criminal complaint.
In electronic commerce, the consumer's interlocutor is often not a single person, but a chain consisting of seller, platform and payment institution. The Constitutional Court's decision dated 2026 has led to a re-discussion of the responsibility of the intermediary service provider in this chain. Until the new regulation comes into force, it is of great importance to collect evidence in a timely manner and to carry out bank and platform processes simultaneously.
Küheylan Law Firm provides legal support in disputes arising from marketplace and social media shopping, examining payment and order records, drafting claims against the platform and seller, and carrying out a bank objection and criminal complaint together. Monitoring new developments in the legislation helps ensure that new opportunities are not missed in favor of the consumer.
Important Legal Notice: This guide has been prepared for general information purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Legislation and judicial precedents may change; The concrete circumstances of each event are different. In order to avoid loss of rights, a case-specific legal evaluation must be made in terms of lawsuit, application and objection periods.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK