Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019, kekuatan eksekutorial sertifikat jaminan fidusia telah mengalami pergeseran makna, di mana eksekusi tidak dapat dilakukan secara sepihak oleh kreditur apabila debitur keberatan atau tidak mengakui adanya wanprestasi. Tetapi pada praktiknya, tindakan penarikan unit kendaraan di lapangan masih ada yang dilakukan secara paksa oleh pihak ketiga yaitu debt collector.

Tujuan dari Penulisan skripsi ini adalah untuk menjelaskan dan menganalisis prosedur penarikan kendaraan oleh PT Astra Sedya Finance melalui debt collector, faktor penyebab PT Astra Sedya Finance melakukan penarikan kendaraan melalui debt collector, bentuk penyelesaian hukum terhadap debitur atas penarikan kendaraan oleh perusahaan pembiayaan.

Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode yuridis empiris, yang mana data diperlukan berupa data sekunder dan data primer. Data sekunder diperoleh dari penelitian kepustakaan dengan cara membaca teori, buku-buku, literatur hukum, dan peraturan perundang-undangan. Data primer diperoleh dari penelitian lapangan dengan mewawancarai responden dan informan.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa prosedur penarikan kendaraan oleh PT Astra Sedya Finance (ASF) dilakukan dengan beberapa tahapan yaitu tahapan identifikasi wanprestasi dan penagihan administratif, tahap kunjungan lapangan dan analisis itikad baik, tahap penugasan debt collector eksternal, tahap pasca penarikan (lelang). Faktor penyebab PT ASF melakukan penarikan kendaraan secara paksa oleh perusahaan pembiayaan yaitu sikap debitur yang tidak kooperatif, keberadaan objek jaminan yang sudah tidak diketahui, penerapan dari sertifikat jaminan fidusia oleh kreditur. Bentuk penyelesaian hukum bagi debitur yaitu penyelesaian melalui dana kompensasi serta diberikannya masa sanggah oleh pihak perusahaan pembiayaan dan penyelesaian hukum yang dapat di tempuh debitur berdasarkan perspektif OJK yaitu melakukan pengaduan lewat Aplikasi Portal Perlindungan Konsumen, OJK memfasilitasi mediasi, melakukan pengawasan terhadap Perusahaan pembiayaan dan berdasarkan perspektif Lembaga Advokasi Perlindungan Konsumen yaitu pendampingan hukum, gugatan perdata serta pidana.

Disarankan kepada PT ASF untuk lebih mengutamakan prosedur eksekusi sesuai Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 melalui penetapan pengadilan apabila terjadi sengketa wanprestasi dan tidak memaksakan penarikan secara mandiri jika debitur secara tegas menyatakan keberatan. Kepada OJK diharapkan dapat memperkuat pengawasan terhadap etika penagihan di lapangan. Kepada masyarakat atau debitur disarankan untuk meningkatkan pemahaman hak-hak debitur agar mampu menempuh jalur hukum yang tersedia apabila terjadi tindakan eksekusi yang tidak sesuai prosedur hukum.

Based on the Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019, the executorial force of a fiduciary security certificate has undergone a significant legal shift, whereby a creditor may no longer unilaterally enforce the fiduciary security if the debtor disputes or refuses to acknowledge the occurrence of default. Nevertheless, in practice, repossession of motor vehicles is still frequently carried out through coercive measures by third-party debt collectors. This thesis aims to examine and analyze the procedures employed by PT Astra Sedya Finance in repossessing motor vehicles through debt collectors, the factors underlying the company's decision to utilize debt collectors in the repossession process, and the legal remedies available to debtors whose vehicles have been repossessed by finance companies. This study employs an empirical juridical research method, utilizing both primary and secondary data. Secondary data were obtained through library research by examining legal theories, textbooks, legal literature, and applicable statutory regulations. Primary data were collected through field research by conducting interviews with respondents and key informants. The findings demonstrate that the vehicle repossession procedure implemented by PT Astra Sedya Finance (ASF) consists of several stages, namely: (i) identification of the debtor's default and administrative collection efforts; (ii) field visits and assessment of the debtor's good faith; (iii) assignment of external debt collectors; and (iv) post-repossession procedures, including the auction of the repossessed vehicle. The principal factors leading PT ASF to conduct vehicle repossessions through debt collectors include the debtor's lack of cooperation, the inability to locate the collateral object, and the creditor's reliance on the executorial power of the fiduciary security certificate. The legal remedies available to debtors include compensation schemes and the provision of an objection period by the finance company. From the perspective of the Financial Services Authority (OJK), debtors may submit complaints through the Consumer Protection Portal Application, obtain mediation facilitated by OJK, and benefit from OJK's supervisory authority over finance companies. From the perspective of Consumer Protection Advocacy Institutions, debtors may pursue legal assistance, civil litigation, or criminal proceedings where appropriate. This study recommends that PT Astra Sedya Finance prioritize the execution procedures prescribed by Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019, particularly by seeking a court order where a dispute exists regarding the debtor's alleged default, and refrain from carrying out unilateral repossession where the debtor expressly objects to the existence of such default. It is further recommended that the Financial Services Authority (OJK) strengthen its supervision of debt collection practices to ensure compliance with legal and ethical standards. Finally, members of the public, particularly debtors, should enhance their understanding of their legal rights so that they are able to pursue the legal remedies available where repossession is conducted in violation of applicable legal procedures.