Jannus Manurung, Yuniar Rahmatiar, Muhamad Abas


In the current era, all people can own a motorized vehicle in an easy and fast way. This is triggered by the way to buy a motorized car with credit. In terms of withdrawing vehicles, finance companies use the role of a third party (a debt collector) to carry out their actions in collecting creditors and also carrying out forced withdrawals of collateral objects, where the financing company feels that the actions taken are safe. A debt collector is a third party who assists a finance company in resolving a credit problem that the finance company cannot determine. The problem is how the collector department's implementation of the motorized vehicle withdrawal process is linked to law number 42 of 1999 concerning fiduciary guarantees and how consumer protection for motorized vehicle withdrawals by the collector department is linked to law number 42 of 1999 concerning fiduciary contracts. The research method is qualitative, with the approach used in this research being normative juridical. The results of his study show that Consumer Protection Against Motor Vehicle Withdrawal has not gone well because when a consumer's motorized vehicle has been withdrawn, there is no further information on the vehicle's whereabouts, whether it is being sold or auctioned. So that when the car is going to be auctioned or sold, the consumer needs to know that the result is more than or sufficient to pay off the consumer's debt. Many unscrupulous debt collectors do not have a clear professional status and sometimes threaten consumers, which causes harm to consumers and the most crucial factor they register. A fiduciary Guarantee is the registration of a motorized vehicle as a fiduciary guarantee to have legal certainty for both the party providing the financing and the party receiving the funding. No legal counseling is carried out to the Financing Company related to fiduciary guarantees, especially in registering fiduciary collateral goods, where registration of fiduciary warranties is basically to obtain legal certainty over the object's position fiduciary as well as confidence for the parties agreeing within it.

Keywords: Legal Protection, Consumers, Debt Collector

Full Text:



Erawati, E., & Budiono, H. (2010). Penjelasan hukum tentang kebatalan perjanjian. Nasional Legal Reform Program.

Ginting, L., Kamello, T., Yamin, M., & Saidin, O. K. (2020). Building Without Accompanied By Land Right As Fiduciary Collateral Object. Palarch’s Journal Of Archaeology Of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(4), 1729–1743.

Harjono, D. K., Tehupeiory, A., & Kandou, H. (2022). Guarantee Of Legal Assurance And Justice For The Implementation Of Consumer Financing. Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana, 11(2), 263–283.

Hosanna, T. T., & Nanakorn, P. (2018). The Importance of Trustworthiness Certification in Relation to Consumer Protection in Electronic Transactions Under Indonesian Law (Doctoral Dissertation, Thammasat University) [PhD Thesis]. Doctoral Dissertation, Thammasat University.

Isnaeni, M. (2018). Seberkas Diorama Hukum Kontrak. Surabaya: Revka Petra Media.

Jamil, M. (2021). Fiduciary Security Arrangements and Issues in Indonesia. Journal of Human Rights, Culture and Legal System, 1(2).

Macaulay, S. (1979). Lawyers and consumer protection laws. Law & Soc’y Rev., 14, 115.

Markum, M., Widhiyanti, H. N., & Widiarto, A. E. (2021). Legal Consequences of Fiduciary Guarantee Execution Post Decision of Indonesian Constitutional Court. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 8(8), 218–230.

Munir, F. (2002). Hukum tentang Pembiayaan (Dalam Teori dan Praktek). Penerbit PT. Citra Aditya Bakti. Bandung.

Ohlhausen, M. K., & Okuliar, A. P. (2015). Competition, consumer protection, and the right [approach] to privacy. Antitrust LJ, 80, 121.

Panggabean, H. P. (2012). Praktik standaard contract (perjajian baku): Dalam perjanjian kredit pebankan. Penerbit PT Alumni.

Ramsay, I. (2006). Consumer law, regulatory capitalism and the’new learning’in regulation [Paper in special issue honouring the late Emeritus Professor David Harland.]. Sydney Law Review, The, 28(1), 9–35.

Usman, R. (2021). Makna Pengalihan Hak Kepemilikan Benda Objek Jaminan Fidusia Atas Dasar Kepercayaan. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 28(1), 139–162.

Yudha, H. A. (2010). Hukum Perjanjian Asas Proporsionalitas Dalam Kontrak Komersial. Jakarta: Penerbit Kencana Prenada Media Group.


Article Metrics

Abstract - 128 PDF - 110


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Indexed by:

Web Analytics Made Easy - StatCounter

View My Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.