@phdthesis{digilib75915,
           month = {January},
           title = {ANALISIS PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KONSUMEN DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA JUAL BELI RUMAH FIKTIF (STUDI PUTUSAN BADAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KONSUMEN NO. 1/ABTR/BPSKYK/ VIII/2025)},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 19103040075 An Nisaa? Zakiyya Irfan Amin},
            year = {2026},
            note = {Annisa Dian Arini, M.H.},
        keywords = {Perlindungan Konsumen, Sengketa Perumahan, BPSK,
Arbitrase, Successor Liability},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/75915/},
        abstract = {The housing sector in Indonesia is often characterized by asymmetric disputes
that are detrimental to consumers, one of which involves developer default cases
through the sale of "fictitious housing." This research is motivated by the urgency
to protect citizens' constitutional rights to housing, which are violated by bad-faith
business practices, as reflected in the Yogyakarta City Consumer Dispute
Settlement Body (BPSK) Decision No. 01/Abtr/BPSK-YK/VIII/2025. The core
issue of this study focuses on how the legal construction of consumer protection is
applied during the transfer of liability between developers, as well as the extent of
the effectiveness of BPSK arbitration awards in restoring consumer rights amidst
the institution's limited executorial authority.
This study employs a juridical-empirical (socio-legal) research method with
a descriptive-analytical nature. The author combines secondary data from
regulations with primary data obtained through participatory observation of online
arbitration proceedings and in-depth interviews with the BPSK Panel. The proposed
theoretical framework is based on Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1999 tentang
Perlindungan Konsumen concerning Consumer Protection, integrated with the
corporate law doctrine of Successor Liability and the principle of Salus Populi
Suprema Lex Esto to analyze the validity of procedural discretion in electronic
hearings.
The results indicate three main points. First, BPSK Yogyakarta City
implemented a progressive legal breakthrough through the legitimation of online
hearings (Zoom Meeting) to overcome geographical constraints and guarantee
access to justice. Second, substantively, the Arbitration Panel correctly applied the
principle of Successor Liability to seek consumer rights protection by imposing
compensation liability on the developer acquiring the disputed development
company, thereby preventing unfulfilled consumer rights violations. Third,
although the decision is final and binding, consumer protection remains incomplete
due to weak regulations that do not grant BPSK the authority to impose
administrative sanctions such as blacklisting, leaving legal loopholes in the aspect
of real execution in the field.}
}