TANGGUNG JAWAB HUKUM PENERBIT UANG ELEKTRONIK TERHADAP KERUGIAN NASABAH PENGGUNA UANG ELEKTRONIK DI BANK MANDIRI

IF 0.4 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Salsabila Sekar Wahri, Ria Safitri, Faris Satria Alam
{"title":"TANGGUNG JAWAB HUKUM PENERBIT UANG ELEKTRONIK TERHADAP KERUGIAN NASABAH PENGGUNA UANG ELEKTRONIK DI BANK MANDIRI","authors":"Salsabila Sekar Wahri, Ria Safitri, Faris Satria Alam","doi":"10.15408/jlr.v4i4.21093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study seeks to explain the topic of the legal liability of e-money card issuers for losses incurred by their clients. Due to imprecise compensation procedures for the issuer, the issuer's legal responsibility is legally deficient, which frequently produces legal doubt for the protection of customers. It renders the e-money issuer legally immune from liability. In particular, this research attempts to create legal comparisons to demonstrate that the compensation and liability mechanism is not exhaustive, using UU No. 8, 1999 on Consumer Protection as an example. This research also discusses compensation for losses incurred by Bank Mandiri customers as a result of the incomplete compensation process outlined in Bank Indonesia Regulation Number 20/6 / PBI / 2018. This study is a legal normative study using a statutory approach (statute approach) and a case study approach (case approach). This research uses literary studies as its method of data collection. Through his or her review of the relevant literature, the researcher gathered and examined several documents using content analysis. The findings of this study demonstrate that the issuer of electronic money cannot be held liable for losses caused by client error. This compensation mechanism can only be used if the error was committed by the electronic money issuer and was determined to be incompatible with the Consumer Protection Law, which prioritizes consumer rights.","PeriodicalId":40374,"journal":{"name":"ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v4i4.21093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study seeks to explain the topic of the legal liability of e-money card issuers for losses incurred by their clients. Due to imprecise compensation procedures for the issuer, the issuer's legal responsibility is legally deficient, which frequently produces legal doubt for the protection of customers. It renders the e-money issuer legally immune from liability. In particular, this research attempts to create legal comparisons to demonstrate that the compensation and liability mechanism is not exhaustive, using UU No. 8, 1999 on Consumer Protection as an example. This research also discusses compensation for losses incurred by Bank Mandiri customers as a result of the incomplete compensation process outlined in Bank Indonesia Regulation Number 20/6 / PBI / 2018. This study is a legal normative study using a statutory approach (statute approach) and a case study approach (case approach). This research uses literary studies as its method of data collection. Through his or her review of the relevant literature, the researcher gathered and examined several documents using content analysis. The findings of this study demonstrate that the issuer of electronic money cannot be held liable for losses caused by client error. This compensation mechanism can only be used if the error was committed by the electronic money issuer and was determined to be incompatible with the Consumer Protection Law, which prioritizes consumer rights.
电子货币出版商对自动银行电子用户损失的法律责任
本研究旨在解释电子货币发卡机构对其客户所遭受的损失的法律责任。由于对发行人的赔偿程序不明确,发行人的法律责任在法律上存在缺陷,经常对客户的保护产生法律上的疑问。它使电子货币发行者在法律上免于承担责任。特别是,本研究试图创建法律比较,以证明赔偿和责任机制不是详尽的,以1999年关于消费者保护的UU No. 8为例。本研究还讨论了由于印度尼西亚银行法规第20/6 / PBI / 2018号规定的赔偿程序不完整而导致Mandiri银行客户遭受损失的赔偿。本研究是一项法律规范性研究,采用了法定方法(法规方法)和案例研究方法(案例方法)。本研究采用文学研究作为数据收集的方法。通过他或她对相关文献的回顾,研究人员使用内容分析收集和检查了一些文件。本研究的结果表明,电子货币的发行机构不能对客户错误造成的损失承担责任。这种补偿机制只能在错误是由电子货币发行者犯下的情况下使用,并且被确定与消费者保护法不相容,该法优先考虑消费者的权利。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
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