KEWENANGAN PENYELESIAN SENGKETA KONSUMEN PERJANJIAN KREDIT MOTOR DALAM PERPEKTIF HUKUM

Kewenangan Penyelesian, Sengketa Konsumen, Perjanjian Kredit, Motor Dalam, Perpektif Hukum, A. Pendahuluan, Undang-Undang Dasar Negara
{"title":"KEWENANGAN PENYELESIAN SENGKETA KONSUMEN PERJANJIAN KREDIT MOTOR DALAM PERPEKTIF HUKUM","authors":"Kewenangan Penyelesian, Sengketa Konsumen, Perjanjian Kredit, Motor Dalam, Perpektif Hukum, A. Pendahuluan, Undang-Undang Dasar Negara","doi":"10.25139/lex.v5i2.4579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The issue of forced motorcycle withdrawals by leasing companies is of particular concern to regulations that have not yet provided a solution to these problems, considering that the application of standard agreements has its own weaknesses, consumer issues handled by BPSK regarding motorcycle withdrawals by leasing parties, resulting in consumers losing control over motorcycles but BPSK does not have a big role in carrying out legal actions and its authority is still limited and its decisions still do not have executorial legal force, seeing this many phenomena the Constitutional Court issued Constitutional Court Decision No.18/PUU-XVII/2019 this decision gives a lot perceptions about the procedure for withdrawing vehicles that are fiduciary guarantees, one of which is the right to execute through the courts, but execution without trial is allowed on the condition that the debtor acknowledges a default. This means that the Court only examines article 15 paragraph 2 while the Obj The guarantee certificate has actually been transferred unilaterally, meaning that it is legal for the creditor to make a withdrawal with reference to the contents of the main agreement between the creditor and the debtor and article 1338 of the Civil Code. \nKeywords: Authority. Dispute, motorbikes, Law","PeriodicalId":166391,"journal":{"name":"Lex Journal : Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lex Journal : Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25139/lex.v5i2.4579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The issue of forced motorcycle withdrawals by leasing companies is of particular concern to regulations that have not yet provided a solution to these problems, considering that the application of standard agreements has its own weaknesses, consumer issues handled by BPSK regarding motorcycle withdrawals by leasing parties, resulting in consumers losing control over motorcycles but BPSK does not have a big role in carrying out legal actions and its authority is still limited and its decisions still do not have executorial legal force, seeing this many phenomena the Constitutional Court issued Constitutional Court Decision No.18/PUU-XVII/2019 this decision gives a lot perceptions about the procedure for withdrawing vehicles that are fiduciary guarantees, one of which is the right to execute through the courts, but execution without trial is allowed on the condition that the debtor acknowledges a default. This means that the Court only examines article 15 paragraph 2 while the Obj The guarantee certificate has actually been transferred unilaterally, meaning that it is legal for the creditor to make a withdrawal with reference to the contents of the main agreement between the creditor and the debtor and article 1338 of the Civil Code. Keywords: Authority. Dispute, motorbikes, Law
在法律范围内解决消费者纠纷的权力范围
考虑到标准协议的适用有其自身的弱点,租赁公司强制撤回摩托车的问题是尚未为这些问题提供解决办法的条例特别关注的问题,BPSK处理关于租赁方撤回摩托车的消费者问题;导致消费者失去控制摩托车但BPSK没有很大的作用在执行法律行动和权威仍然是有限的,其决策仍然没有遗嘱执行人的法律效力,看到这么多现象宪法法院颁布了宪法法院决定第18号/ PUU-XVII / 2019这个决定给了很多看法的过程信托担保收回车辆,其中一个是正确的通过法院来执行,但在债务人承认违约的条件下,允许不经审判执行。这意味着法院只审查第15条第2款,而Obj担保证书实际上是单方面转让的,这意味着债权人可以根据债权人与债务人之间的主要协议内容和《民法典》第1338条提出撤回。关键词:权威。纠纷,摩托车,法律
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信