Medical Tourism Facilitator Contract: Who You Actually Sign With
LymyVoyage finding
Partially supported by the available data.
Quoted from each platform's own terms; whether a court would hold a platform liable is untested, and the Australian view is one law firm's reading.
You find a clinic abroad through a booking platform. A coordinator answers your questions, sends quotes and may take a deposit. But when the treatment goes wrong, who is your contract with?

The platforms' own terms answer that clearly: not them. We read the terms of five medical travel platforms. Each one says it is not a party to the treatment contract between you and the clinic. Three of them also cap what you can claim from the platform itself.
Five platforms' terms, side by side
| Platform | Party to the treatment contract? | Limit on the platform's own liability | Law named in the terms |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bookimed | No; "not a representative of the Clinics"1 | Excludes damages from using the site, to the extent law allows1 | Portugal, "without prejudice to" consumer rights at home1 |
| Medical Tourism Association | No; "not involved in the contractual relationship"2 | Limited to the fees it charged you2 | Florida, Palm Beach County2 |
| Better by MTA | No; "a direct contract is established between you and the Provider"3 | Limited to the fees paid to it for that treatment3 | Florida, Palm Beach County3 |
| Qunomedical | Describes itself as "an intermediary and technical service provider"4 | Liable for intent and gross negligence; exclusions do not apply to harm to "life, body and health"4 | Berlin courts for patients outside the EU4 |
| PlacidWay | No; not a party "merely because the parties met or communicated" on it5 | The greater of what you paid it in the past 12 months or $1005 | Colorado5 |
These are five platforms, chosen because their terms are public in English. They are not a sample of the whole industry.
What "not a party" means in the wording
Bookimed's terms say it "is not a representative of the Clinics and does not guarantee the quality of their services". They add that it is "not an intermediary between the patient and Medical Centers".1
The Medical Tourism Association, which runs a patient platform, goes further. Once a user and a provider agree a contract, it "is not involved in the contractual relationship" and "does not assume any rights, obligations or liabilities" from it.2
Better by MTA, its booking service, puts it in one line: on confirmation, "a direct contract is established between you and the Provider".3 It "facilitates the booking and payment process but is not a party to the contract".3
Deposits are where the line blurs
Several platforms handle money, which is where a patient might reasonably think the platform is more than a noticeboard.
- Bookimed may take a confirmation deposit of 200 euros or dollars. Its terms describe this as "a payment for our services", which the clinic then deducts from the treatment price. It is refundable if you ask at least 10 days before the appointment.1
- Better by MTA calls itself the "Merchant of Record" and processes refunds. But "any decision to refund rests solely with the Provider".3
- The Medical Tourism Association lists, among its paid services, "secure payment due to Medical Tourism Association acting as a guarantor for any deposits".2
- Qunomedical says it is not a payment agent or money recipient for any clinic. It is paid by the clinics, so its service is free to patients.4
So a platform can take your money and still not be the one that owes you the treatment.
When a platform can still answer for it
The terms are written by the platforms. Whether a court accepts them is a separate question, and the answer depends on the country.
Astris Law, an Australian law firm, sets out the position under the Australian Consumer Law. It says an agent booking for a named clinic is not a party to the treatment contract. But a business that "holds itself out as supplying the whole package risks being treated as the supplier of all of it, treatment included".6
The same firm says a term excluding an agent's own consumer guarantees is void under section 64 of that law.6 A clause choosing a foreign law does not keep the Australian law out on its own. It cites the case of Valve, a US company held to Australian consumer guarantees despite terms choosing Washington State law.6
The firm also notes that no reported Australian decision appears to have considered a medical tourism facilitator.6
The platforms' own terms leave room for this. PlacidWay's liability cap does not limit "non-waivable consumer rights".5 Bookimed's choice of Portuguese law is "without prejudice to any consumer rights provided by the laws of your country of residence".1
What the terms leave out
- The treatment itself. Every set of terms points claims about care back to the clinic. PlacidWay says disputes over clinical care, malpractice and refunds owed by a provider "are primarily between the Patient and Provider".5
- Whose law covers the clinic. For UK and EU patients, the home-law rule for consumer contracts does not apply when the service is supplied entirely in another country.7 Treatment in Istanbul is supplied in Istanbul. Our article on suing a clinic abroad covers which court can hear that claim.
- The commission. Qunomedical says clinics pay it.4 Astris Law says marketing a service as independent can make silence about a commission misleading in Australia.6 Our article on facilitator commissions covers what they are typically paid.
- Untested ground. The Australian position, as the law firm says, rests on general principle.6 We found no court decision on a medical tourism platform in the countries we checked.
How to use this before you book
Before paying anything, find the name of the clinic's legal entity on the quote. That is who you are contracting with for the treatment.
Ask the platform in writing what it is responsible for: the booking, the deposit, the translation, the transfers. Ask who decides a refund, and keep a dated copy of the platform's terms and its sales pages. If something goes wrong, those pages are what a lawyer will read first.
A platform found your clinic and took your deposit. Five platforms' terms all say they are not a party to your treatment contract. So who is?
Footnotes
-
https://us-uk.bookimed.com/page/terms-of-service/ — Bookimed, "Terms of Service" (last updated Aug 2026). Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6
-
https://medicaltourismassociation.com/content/terms-and-conditions — Medical Tourism Association, "Terms and Conditions". Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5
-
https://www.better.medicaltourism.com/better-by-mta-terms-service — Better by MTA (Medical Tourism Association), "Terms of Service" (effective Oct 4, 2024). Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6
-
https://www.qunomedical.com/en/terms-and-conditions — Qunomedical, "General Terms and Conditions". Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5
-
https://www.placidway.com/termsconditions/ — PlacidWay, LLC, "PlacidWay Terms of Use" (modified Sep 8, 2026). Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5
-
https://www.astrislaw.com/article/medical-tourism-agents-australian-consumer-law.md — Astris Law (law firm, Brisbane), "Medical Tourism Agents and the Australian Consumer Law: Claims, Commissions and Booking Terms". Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6
-
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2008/593/article/6 — Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (Rome I), Article 6(4)(a), as retained in UK law. Accessed Oct 29, 2026. ↩
Evidence at a glanceMethodology
| Statement | Source | Tier | Date | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bookimed's terms say it is not a representative of the clinics, does not guarantee their services, and is governed by Portuguese law without prejudice to home-country consumer rights | Platform terms of service1 | 3 | 2026-08 | Approximate |
| The Medical Tourism Association says it is not involved in the contract between user and provider, assumes no rights, obligations or liabilities from it, and limits its liability to fees charged | Platform terms and conditions2 | 3 | 2026-10 | Approximate |
| Better by MTA says a direct contract is formed between patient and provider, that it is not a party, that refund decisions rest solely with the provider, and caps its liability at fees paid for that treatment | Platform terms of service3 | 3 | 2024-10 | Approximate |
| PlacidWay says it is not a party to the treatment contract and caps its liability at the greater of fees paid to it in 12 months or $100, without limiting non-waivable consumer rights | Platform terms of use5 | 3 | 2026-09 | Approximate |
| All five platforms reviewed disclaim being a party to, or responsible for, the treatment contract | Calculated by this publication Count of the five platforms' terms that contain a not-a-party or intermediary-only clause. | 3 | -- | Approximate |
| Under the Australian Consumer Law, a platform holding itself out as supplying the whole package risks being treated as the supplier of the treatment, and a term excluding its own guarantees is void; no reported decision has considered a medical tourism facilitator | Law firm commentary6 | 3 | 2026 | Approximate |


