ANALISIS PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KONSUMEN DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA JUAL BELI RUMAH FIKTIF (STUDI PUTUSAN BADAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KONSUMEN NO. 1/ABTR/BPSKYK/ VIII/2025)NIM.: 19103040075An Nisaa’ Zakiyya Irfan AminauthorThe 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.343.071 Perlindungan Konsumen2026-01-28UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA;FAKULTAS SYARIAH DAN HUKUMThesis