PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PEMBELI RUMAH UMUM DARI PERBUATAN WANPRESTASI OLEH DEVELOPER/PENGEMBANG SESUAI DENGAN UNDANG - UNDANG NOMOR 8 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN

Rani Shafira, J. N. Saly
{"title":"PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PEMBELI RUMAH UMUM DARI PERBUATAN WANPRESTASI OLEH DEVELOPER/PENGEMBANG SESUAI DENGAN UNDANG - UNDANG NOMOR 8 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN","authors":"Rani Shafira, J. N. Saly","doi":"10.24912/ADIGAMA.V2I1.5267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Housing or complex is a collection of houses as part of settlements, both urban and rural, equipped with infrastructure, facilities and public utilities as a result of efforts to fulfill livable houses. Nowadays housing development often happens and developers have begun to promote the building before the building was completed. Then after consumers do PPJB with the developer. But the problem that often arises is that developers have bad intentions with various things to the detriment of consumers. In this case the developer had a bad intention by guaranteeing violet garden consumer ownership certificates to Maybank to obtain a loan of funds which resulted in a loss for consumers. The problem that the author raises how is the responsibility of the developer who defaults on general home buyers according to UUPK? What is the legal protection for general home buyers from defaults carried out by developers according to UUPK? What are the obstacles and efforts of the government in implementing the UUPK against the default problems that the developer has made? The author examines this case with normative research methods. The results of the analysis obtained by the author state that the developer has defaulted on the consumer, the developer cannot be held responsible for his mistakes, the developer has violated his obligations as a business actor and the developer does not fulfill the consumer rights set out in the UUPK. Based on this case, the UUPK should be revised and consumers must be more careful in making home purchases.","PeriodicalId":206816,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Hukum Adigama","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Hukum Adigama","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24912/ADIGAMA.V2I1.5267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Housing or complex is a collection of houses as part of settlements, both urban and rural, equipped with infrastructure, facilities and public utilities as a result of efforts to fulfill livable houses. Nowadays housing development often happens and developers have begun to promote the building before the building was completed. Then after consumers do PPJB with the developer. But the problem that often arises is that developers have bad intentions with various things to the detriment of consumers. In this case the developer had a bad intention by guaranteeing violet garden consumer ownership certificates to Maybank to obtain a loan of funds which resulted in a loss for consumers. The problem that the author raises how is the responsibility of the developer who defaults on general home buyers according to UUPK? What is the legal protection for general home buyers from defaults carried out by developers according to UUPK? What are the obstacles and efforts of the government in implementing the UUPK against the default problems that the developer has made? The author examines this case with normative research methods. The results of the analysis obtained by the author state that the developer has defaulted on the consumer, the developer cannot be held responsible for his mistakes, the developer has violated his obligations as a business actor and the developer does not fulfill the consumer rights set out in the UUPK. Based on this case, the UUPK should be revised and consumers must be more careful in making home purchases.
根据1999年第8条关于消费者保护的规定,开发人员/开发者对公共住房的购买者行为的法律保护
住房或综合体是作为城市和农村住区一部分的房屋的集合,配备了基础设施、设施和公用设施,作为实现宜居住房的努力的结果。现在的住房开发经常发生,开发商开始在建筑建成之前就进行推广。然后在消费者与开发者进行PPJB之后。但经常出现的问题是,开发者在各种事情上的不良意图损害了消费者的利益。在本案中,开发商为获得资金贷款,向Maybank担保violet garden消费者权属证书,造成了消费者的损失。作者提出的问题是,根据UUPK,拖欠普通购房者的开发商的责任是什么?根据UUPK,一般购房者对开发商违约的法律保护是什么?针对开发商的违约问题,政府在实施UUPK方面有哪些障碍和努力?作者用规范的研究方法来考察这个案例。作者获得的分析结果表明,开发商对消费者违约,开发商不能对他的错误负责,开发商违反了他作为商业行为者的义务,开发商没有履行UUPK规定的消费者权利。在这种情况下,应该修改UUPK,消费者在购买房屋时必须更加谨慎。
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