Kajian Hukum Terhadap Wanprestasi Dalam Perjanjian Utang Piutang Dengan Jaminan Sertifikat Hak Milik Pihak Ketiga (Studi Putusan Nomor 264/PDT.G/2024/PN. MDN)

Abstract

Dalam praktik perjanjian utang piutang, sering ditemukan debitur menggunakan jaminan berupa sertipikat tanah milik pihak ketiga untuk memperoleh fasilitas kredit dari kreditur. Permasalahan muncul ketika debitur melakukan wanprestasi, dimana aset milik pihak ketiga yang tidak menikmati pinjaman dan tidak melakukan wanprestasi terancam dieksekusi untuk pelunasan utang debitur. Tujuan dari penelitian ini ialah untuk menganalisis bentuk perlindungan hukum yang diberikan kepada pihak ketiga pemilik jaminan serta mengkaji pertimbangan hakim dalam memutus perkara yang melibatkan pihak ketiga pemilik jaminan ketika terjadi wanprestasi. Dari uraian diatas penulis menganalisis Putusan Nomor 264/Pdt.G/2024/PN Mdn dimana terdapat pihak ketiga pemilik jaminan yang tanahnya dijadikan agunan atas pinjaman debitur yang mengalami wanprestasi. Dengan ini penulis merumuskan beberapa pokok permasalahan sebagai berikut, bagaimana perlindungan hukum bagi pihak ketiga pemilik jaminan dalam hal terjadi wanprestasi oleh debitur?, bagaimana pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam memberikan putusan Nomor 264/Pdt.G/2024/PN Mdn?. Metode yang digunakan adalah pendekatan Yuridis Normatif. Data dikumpulkan dari data sekunder dan data primer, dengan metode analisis Kualitatif. Teknik pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui penelusuran karya tulis serta melakukan wawancara. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ini perlindungan hukum bagi pihak ketiga terdiri dari perlindungan preventif melalui prosedur pembebanan Hak Tanggungan dan perlindungan represif melalui sanksi administrative. Namun dalam praktiknya pihak ketiga tetap berisiko kehilangan asetnya melalui eksekusi Hak Tanggungan sehingga prinsip kehati-hatian sangat penting diterapkan, sebagaimana dipertimbangkan hakim dalam Putusan Nomor 264/Pdt.G/2024/PN Mdn yang telah sesuai dengan ketentuan UU No. 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan. In the practice of debt agreements, debtors often use collateral in the form of land certificates belonging to third parties to obtain credit facilities from creditors. Problems arise when the debtor defaults, whereby the assets of the third party, who is not receiving the loan and has not defaulted, are threatened with being seized to satisfy the debtor's debt. The purpose of this study is to analyze the form of legal protection provided to third parties who own collateral and to examine the judge's considerations in deciding cases involving third parties who own collateral when a default occurs. From the description above, the author analyzes Decision Number 264/Pdt.G/2024/PN Mdn where there is a third party who owns collateral whose land is used as collateral for a debtor's loan who is in default. Hereby, the author formulates several main problems as follows, how is the legal protection for third parties who own collateral in the event of a default by the debtor?, what are the judge's legal considerations in giving Decision Number 264/Pdt.G/2024/PN Mdn?. The method used is a Normative Juridical approach. Data were collected from secondary and primary data, using a Qualitative analysis method. Data collection techniques were carried out through searching for written works and conducting interviews. Based on the results of this study, legal protection for third parties consists of preventive protection through the procedure for imposing Mortgage Rights and repressive protection through administrative. However, third parties still risk losing their assets through the execution of the mortgage right through the KPKNL customer if the debtor defaults. Therefore, third parties must exercise caution before pledging their assets, as considered by the judge in Decision Number 264/Pdt.G/2024/PN Mdn which is in accordance with the provisions of Law No. 4 of 1996 concerning Mortgage Rights.