Publication Search

Legal protection for consumers is a crucial element in the legal relationship between business actors and the public, particularly in high-risk service sectors such as gas stove repair services. In practice, many consumers still experience losses due to negligence by service providers, whether caused by inadequate technical handling or insufficient information regarding the condition of the stove after repairs. This study aims to identify and analyze the forms of legal protection available to consumers who suffer losses as a result of such negligence, as well as to determine the types of legal liability that may be imposed on gas stove repair service providers. Using a normative legal research method, this study applies both legislative and conceptual approaches. The legislative approach examines relevant laws and regulations concerning consumer protection, while the conceptual approach analyzes legal principles and expert doctrines related to liability. The findings indicate that consumer protection is provided in two forms: preventive protection, which ensures product and service safety in accordance with Indonesian National Standards (SNI), and repressive protection, which is implemented through enforcement mechanisms such as claims for compensation or dispute resolution through the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK) or the courts. Business actors who commit negligence in providing repair services can be held legally responsible based on the principles of negligence or strict liability. To strengthen consumer protection, the study recommends the establishment of derivative regulations concerning technician certification, standardized repair service procedures, and integrated supervision of safety compliance within the gas stove repair service industry.

Insurance is a service designed to prevent or mitigate various potential risks. The Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK) is authorized to resolve consumer disputes through three alternative methods: arbitration, conciliation, and mediation. This study aims to analyze the legal force of mediation outcomes and to identify and examine the obstacles encountered in the implementation of insurance dispute resolution through BPSK mediation. This research employs a normative legal method with a statutory approach through literature review. The analysis is conducted qualitatively based on legal regulations and principles. Data is sourced from primary, secondary, and tertiary materials, and the process consists of three stages: formulation, analysis, and conclusion. The findings indicate that although BPSK’s authority is limited, its decisions are final and binding, and mediation agreements remain legally valid. If no objection is filed, the agreement must be implemented, with criminal consequences for non-compliance. However, the effectiveness of consumer dispute resolution remains hindered by weak legal force, limited regulatory framework, institutional capacity constraints, and potential external intervention.

Consumer dispute resolution in Indonesia is an increasingly relevant issue, considering the high dynamics of transactions that occur in the goods and services sector, including in the property sector. Consumers, as the weaker party in business transactions, often face problems related to the quality of goods/services received, delays, unilateral cancellations, or even failure in property development. Therefore, resolving consumer disputes is very important and requires adequate legal protection. This type of research is normative juridical research. Normative research is literature research by examining theoretical approaches and concepts that examine consumer disputes. Normative juridical research is legal research that places law as a building system of norms. Problems arise when consumers in good faith have paid all Down Payment obligations, but the business actor actually takes a unilateral decision to cancel the apartment construction project. Consumers who have invested funds amounting to IDR 307,530,900 are trying to get a refund, but the business actor does not show responsiveness and good faith in the refund process. This situation finally forced consumers to take legal action by filing a lawsuit with BPSK Medan City on December 5 2022. This case is a clear example of the application of consumer protection and the importance of BPSK as an alternative for resolving disputes outside of court. This decision also reflects the principles of justice and legal certainty in consumer disputes, where agreed consumers can obtain their rights through an arbitration mechanism.

The standard agreement for the delivery of goods whose contents or clauses are made by business actors to avoid losses on another day and consumers only have the choice to accept or reject, thus making the position of business actors stronger while consumers are weakened. The UUPK itself does not prohibit the existence of an exoneration clause as long as it does not violate article 18 of the UUPK. The type of research is field research or Empirical Juridical research is carried out by starting from primary data obtained from the research site, the data collection technique is through literature studies and analyzed in a qualitative way, which is a discussion that is carried out by combining literature research and field research. The results of the research obtained in the study show that consumers have been protected by Law No. 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection, If a dispute occurs and a family settlement has been carried out but there is no result or no peace occurs, then consumers can take legal action as stipulated in articles 24 and 25 of the UUPK regarding how the responsibility of business actors, in the resolution of consumer disputes is protected by article 45 of the UUPK concerning dispute resolution. Dispute resolution can be done through the court and out of court, out-of-court dispute resolution can be done by filing a claim for compensation or through the consumer dispute resolution agency (BPSK). As a legal consequence that occurs if there is a clause in the standard agreement that is null and void, even though the standard agreement containing an exoneration clause has been agreed before, the agreement cannot be considered valid because it contradicts one of the contents of article 1320, which is a halal cause, due to the transfer of responsibility.  

This study addresses the legal responsibility of carriers for the loss or damage of goods during road transportation, as stipulated in Law Number 22 of 2009 concerning Traffic and Road Transportation (UU LLAJ). Article 193 of UU LLAJ obliges carriers to provide compensation for any loss incurred during transportation, except in cases of force majeure or third-party negligence. The study also explores the application of breach of contract (wanprestasi) and strict liability principles as the legal foundation for carrier accountability. However, the practical implementation of these regulations often faces challenges, including unclear contractual clauses on liability, difficulties in proving carrier negligence, and slow or inefficient dispute resolution mechanisms. To address these issues, the study proposes strategic measures such as regulatory revisions to clarify carrier liability boundaries, the establishment of standardized transportation contracts, enhanced legal education for stakeholders, strengthened non-litigation mechanisms like mediation and the Consumer Dispute Resolution Agency (BPSK), and the optimization of insurance to mitigate risks. These recommendations aim to foster a more efficient, reliable, and legally protective transportation system for all stakeholders involved.