Legal Consequences for Debtors Due to Failure to Remove Fiduciary Guarantees

Authors

  • Miranti Ayu Rachmawati Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura, Ambon
  • Nancy Silvana Haliwela Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura, Ambon
  • Roulinta Yesvery Sinaga Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura, Ambon

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v6i2.3267

Keywords:

Fiduciary Security, Deletion, Legal Consequences

Abstract

Introduction: The issue of the non-deletion of fiduciary security remains a matter that continues to be overlooked. In many cases, the deletion is not carried out by the fiduciary recipient, their representative, or attorney after the termination of the principal agreement. This situation causes harm to the fiduciary grantor, even though the loss may not be felt directly. One of the consequences is that when the fiduciary grantor applies for a loan from a financial institution, the application may be rejected because the collateral object is still recorded as active in the fiduciary registry.Purposes of the Research: To identify and analyze the factors behind the non-deletion of fiduciary security and the legal consequences for the fiduciary grantor if the fiduciary security is not deleted.Methods of the Research: The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory approach and case approach. The sources of legal materials used include primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. The technique for collecting legal materials is carried out through literature study using a qualitative method, along with limited interviews as supporting field data to strengthen the normative analysis.Findings of the Research: The research results show that the failure to delete fiduciary security by the fiduciary recipient is caused by their negligence and lack of awareness regarding the obligation to carry out the deletion. In addition, the absence of strict sanctions for failing to perform the deletion contributes to the issue. This situation causes harm to the public, resulting in disruptions to their economic activities. Therefore, there is a need for stricter regulations concerning the deletion process, and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights must continuously supervise these financing institutions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citation Metrics

References

Gatot Supramono. Perjanjian Utang Piutang. Jakarta: Kencana, 2013.H Budi Untung. Kredit Perbankan di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Andi, 2000.Humas Kanwil Kemenkumham Maluku, Diseminasi Layanan Fidusia di Maluku Tenggara, Dorong Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Daerah Melalui Pemahaman Hukum Yang Komprehensif, https://maluku.kemenkum.go.id/berita-utama/diseminasi-layanan-fidusia-di-maluku-tenggara-dorong-pertumbuhan-ekonomi-daerah-melalui-pemahaman-hukum-yang-komprehensif. 2023.I Putu Budi Arta Yama, and & I Made Udiana. Sanksi Terhadap Penerima Fidusia Yang Tidak Menghapuskan Jaminan Fidusia Elektronik. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan 5, no. 1 (2020): 138-149. https://doi.org/10.24843/ac.2020.v05.i01.p12.Muhammad Djumhana. Hukum Perbankan di Indonesia (Ilmu Hukum). Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 1996.Ni Putu Sawitri Nandari, Dewa Krisna Prasada, Kadek Julia Mahadewi, Tania Novelin, and Dewa Ayu Putri Sukadana. “Akibat Hukum Terhadap Tidak Dilakukan Penghapusan (Roya) Jaminan Fidusia Setelah Kredit Lunas”. Jurnal Hukum Sasana, 9, no. 1 (2023): 57–68. https://doi.org/10.31599/sasana.v9i1.2249.Ninik Meiyudianti. “Akibat Hukum Kelalaian Kreditur Dalam Melakukan Roya Atas Jaminan Fidusia”, Jurnal Hukum Das Sollen 2, no. 1 (2018): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.32520/das-sollen.v1i4.328.R Subekti. Jaminan-jaminan Untuk Pemberian Kredit Menurut Hukum Indonesia, Bandung: Alumni, 1982.Rachmadi Usman. “Makna Pengalihan Hak Kepemilikan Benda Objek Jaminan Fidusia Atas Dasar Kepercayaan”. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 28, no. 1 (2021): 139–162. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol28.iss1.art7.Reodha Noer Ishak Tuanaya, Bambang Eko Turisno, and Novira Maharani Sukma. "Akibat Hukum Dan Penyelesaian Atas Objek Fidusia Yang Di Fidusia Ulang Apabila Debitur Wanprestasi." Notarius 13, no. 2 (2020): 629-641.Riky Rustam, Hukum Jaminan, Yogyakarta: UII Press, 2017.Rizka Astri Husen, Nancy Silvana Haliwela, and Agustina Balik. "Pertanggungjawaban Debitur Terhadap Kreditur Pada Perjanjian Kredit Dengan Jaminan Fidusia." PATTIMURA Law Study Review 1, no. 1 (2023): 102-111.Soritua Halomoan Siregar. “Al-Iqtishadiyah Manfaat Akta Jaminan Fidusia bagi Konsumen (Debitur)”. Al-Iqtishadiyah: Ekonomi Syariah dan Hukum Ekonomi Syariah 4, no. 2 (2019): 150-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.31602/iqt.v4i2.2046.Sidharta. Hukum Perlindungan Konsumen Indonesia, Jakarta: Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia, 2006.Supianto, and Nanang Tri Budiman. "Pendaftaran Jaminan Fidusia Sebagai Pemenuhan Asas Publisitas." Indonesian Journal of Law and Islamic Law (IJLIL) 2, no. 2 (2020): 192-223. https://doi.org/10.35719/ijl.v1i3.84.Tan Kamello. Hukum Jaminan Dalam Suatu Kebutuhan yang Didambakan, Bandung: Alumni, 2004.Tsuroyyaa Maitsaa' Jaudah, Puji Sulistyaningsih, and Dakum. “Konsekuensi atas Penghapusan Jaminan Fidusia yang Tidak Dilakukan”, Media of Law and Sharia 5, no. 4 (2024): 282-292. https://doi.org/10.18196/mls.v5i4.148.

Downloads

Published

2026-04-30

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Legal Consequences for Debtors Due to Failure to Remove Fiduciary Guarantees. (2026). TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 6(2), 64-76. https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v6i2.3267

Share