p–ISSN: 2723 - 6609 e-ISSN: 2745-5254

Vol. 5, No. 9 September 2024 http://jist.publikasiindonesia.id/

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 2024 3627

Consumer Protection of Tiket.Com Application Services

Noor chalimah hapsari

1*

, Rusito

2

1*

2

*Correspondence

ABSTRACT

Keywords: consumer

protection, unilateral

cancellation, tiket.com.

The country of Indonesia has entered the digital era, where almost all joints of

human life can be fulfilled easily thanks to the help of technology and the rapid use of the

Noor chalimah hapsari, Rusito

(Tuasalamony et al., 2023). The definition of electronic transactions is regulated in Article

1 Number 2 of Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Information and Electronic

Transactions which states that electronic transactions are legal acts carried out using

computers, computer networks, and/or other electronic media (Hassanah, 2015). The

various dynamics of technological growth that occur so quickly cause the relationship

between countries around the world to be limitless. On the one hand, the public as

consumers will feel easy with the development of technology that is so fast and advanced

before being able to run or use the application, will see a request for approval based on

the terms of use or application terms and conditions that must be approved, and if it is not

approved, the services on the application will not be able to be used directly. These terms

and conditions are the basis of the agreement between consumers and application

providers, namely Tiket.com which will be binding for the parties who sign it.

Article 1 Number 10 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection

(hereinafter referred to as UUPK) says that a standard clause in every rule or provision

and condition that has been prepared and determined in advance unilaterally by business

actors which is outlined in a document and/or agreement that is binding and must be

fulfilled by consumers. (Handayani, 2020). In addition, with the existence of this standard

contained in an agreement in which one party avoids fulfilling its obligation to pay

compensation in whole or in part due to a breach of promise or unlawful act is called an

exoneration clause. (Hikmah, 2017).

Regulations regarding the exoneration clause are regulated in Article 18 number 1

letter a of the UUPK which states that business actors offering goods and/or services

intended for trading are prohibited from making or including standard clauses in each

document and/or agreement when declaring the transfer of responsibility of business

actors (Rizal et al., 2019). The inclusion of this clause in an agreement results in losses

to consumers, because the burden that should be borne by business actors shifts to

consumers. The inclusion of standard clauses in the terms and conditions of use of the

canceling consumers who have bought e-tickets, being late or not having the certainty to

return the money that has been paid, in its implementation, the electronic system is not

spared from problems, including in the purchase of e-tickets on Tiket.com. For example,

in February 2021 bought a flight ticket for the Jakarta to Medan route with the booking

code SUEOIM and airline number JT382 on Tiket.com for May 6, 2021 (Naviah, 2021).

This is because of the ban on going home by the government, so the trip was cancelled

by Tiket.com and submitted a refund request to Tiket.com.On April 26, 2021, Tiket.com

When checking with Bank Mandiri several times, via email and phone, until the

consumer came to the Bank Mandiri office, last June 4, 2021, according to the consumer,

there was no refund transaction from Tiket.com. The consumer by showing evidence from

Tiket.com said it was not proof of a fund transfer. Every time I asked for proof of transfer,

Tiket.com did not respond. So all they have said is that it is done and just waiting to enter

the account is just a trick to delay payment, even until the application transaction history

Tiket.com is deleted.

This results in consumers feeling disadvantaged because Tiket.com does not

provide honesty about refunds and clarity unilaterally. Losses suffered by consumers can

be in the form of material and immaterial losses. Consumer material losses are losses that

cancellation and refunds that should be the consumer's right by the e-contract Tiket.com.

descriptive research analysis, using secondary data obtained through literature studies

with primary materials in the form of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer

Protection. Then the data obtained was analyzed in a qualitative normative manner.

A form of consumer protection for Tiket.com Application Services

Based on Article 4 of the Consumer Protection Law (hereinafter referred to as

UUPK) which reads:

"Consumer rights are:

Noor chalimah hapsari, Rusito

1) The right to comfort, safety, and/or security in consuming goods and/or services;

2) The right to clear, true, and truthful information regarding the condition and guarantee

of goods and/or services used;

3) The right to be heard for complaints and opinions regarding the goods and/or services

used;

4) The right to appropriate advocacy, protection, and consumer settlement;

5) The right to education and consumer development;

between business actors and consumers is continuous and mutually sustainable. "The

legal relationship between consumers and business actors begins during the process of

production, distribution, marketing, supply, to the consequences of consuming these

goods and/or services". Both business actors and consumers each have rights and

obligations. A loss will arise and be experienced by one party if the other party is unable

to fulfill its obligations. Both business actors and consumers each have rights and

obligations. A loss will arise and be experienced by one party if the other party is unable

to fulfill its obligations. As a result of these losses, the party that caused the loss is obliged

to fulfill its liability.

The party that feels disadvantaged is the community (hereinafter referred to as

principle of liability based on fault called the "principle based on fault" applies generally

to both civil and criminal law. According to the "principle based on fault", a person can

only be asked for juridical "responsibility" if there is an element of fault in the defendant.

Regarding the principle of liability based on fault, according to the provisions of Article

1365 of the Civil Code which is classified as an unlawful act, it is necessary to observe

the elements that must be met, namely:

1. the existence of deeds;

2. the existence of an element of error;

3. the existence of material and non-material losses;

4. There is a causal relationship between error and loss.

society. The liability of Tiket.com for violating Article 4 letter c and Article 7 of the

UUPK based on unlawful acts is obliged to provide compensation in the form of a refund.

In addition, in reality, the policy did not run as it should. Tiket.com unilaterally

canceled air tickets due to the government's ban on homecoming, but there were

indications of a lack of honesty and unclarity Tiket.com regarding refunds. Tiket.com

said they would refund in about 6 to 14 working days, but after checking according to

their promise, the funds never came in. During that time, continue to communicate with

Tiket.com did not respond. So all they have said is that it is done and just waiting to enter

the account is just a trick to delay payment, even until the application transaction history

Tiket.com is deleted.

Tiket.com as the organizer has mentioned in the terms and conditions of ticket

purchase and cancellation, precisely in point 8 it says that "Neither tiket.com nor our

Provider Partners can be responsible or bear your losses, if We are unable to deliver the

Product or provide Services to You, as a result of things that occur due to compelling

circumstances or that are beyond the control of Us or the Provider Partners to control,

Such as, but not limited to wars, riots, terrorism, industrial disputes, government actions,

epidemics, pandemics, natural disasters, fires or floods, extreme weather, and so on''

advance. When consumers ask Tiket.com for clarity regarding the indications of fraud

found, Tiket.com cannot provide it.

Tiket.com as a business actor has obligations that must be carried out based on

Article 7 of the Consumer Protection Law, which reads: "The obligations of business

actors are:

1. In good faith in carrying out their business activities;

2. Provide true, clear, and truthful information regarding the condition and warranty of

the goods and/or provide explanations of use, repair, and maintenance;

3. Treat or serve consumers correctly and honestly and non-discriminatory;

4. Ensuring the quality of goods and/or services produced and/or traded based on the

Noor chalimah hapsari, Rusito

6. Providing compensation, compensation, and/or reimbursement for losses due to the

use, use, and utilization of goods and/or services traded;

7. Providing compensation, compensation, and/or reimbursement if the goods and/or

services received or utilized are not by the agreement.

Referring to Article 7 Letter A of the Consumer Protection Law, business actors are

required to carry out their business in good faith. The implementation of the agreement

in good faith means that all parties are obliged not to violate the rules of decency and

business activities and does not treat their consumers properly and honestly. This is

contrary to Article 4 letters c and g, and Article 7 letters A, b, and c of the Consumer

Protection Law. Many consumers have submitted their complaints to Tiket.com about

this unilateral cancellation. In response to this, Tiket.com stated a new provision where

consumers must attach proof of screen recording when purchasing tickets so that tickets

can be revalidated. This provision does not exist and is not socialized before ticket sales

begin, so not many consumers have proof of the screen recording. As a result, consumers

whose rights are threatened with harm have no other choice but to accept the cancellation

of the ticket and refund the money. This settlement mechanism is considered

inappropriate because the issuance of the new provisions is unfair and detrimental to

provide honesty about refunds and clarity unilaterally. Losses suffered by consumers can

be in the form of material and immaterial losses. Consumer material losses are losses that

can be calculated or nominated such as money that has been spent to buy airline tickets,

while immaterial losses are abstract losses such as consumer disappointment with

Tiket.com due to the unilateral cancellation and there is also a sense of consumer fear to

buy airline tickets in Tiket.com.

Based on these problems, the applicable provision in Indonesia is the Consumer

Protection Law. This is with legal protection for consumers against the non-fulfillment of

rights that have not been fulfilled by Tiket.com. That in legal protection for consumers is

very important because the position of consumers is often neglected, then a legal balance

1 of the UUPK, consumer protection is any effort that guarantees legal certainty to protect

consumers. The ratio of the existence of UUPK is:

1. Balancing the bargaining power of consumers to business actors, and

2. Encourage business actors to be honest and responsible in carrying out their activities.

The UUPK intends to provide a balance between the parties because the legal

protection provided to consumers is not intended to kill the business of the actors, but

rather to encourage a healthy business climate and improve the quality of goods and/or

the three news, Tiket.com violate the rights of the community (consumers) that should be

protected. So business actors, namely Tiket.com, must be given sanctions by consumer

laws and regulations.

Legal Remedies Against Consumer Protection of Tiket.com Services

Based on the description of the problems that consumers can overcome by filing a

lawsuit for compensation based on the PMH above, the regulation of consumer dispute

settlement in the UUPK is regulated in Articles 45 to 48. In the regulation, it is explained

that aggrieved consumers can sue business actors through institutions in charge of

resolving consumer disputes or through courts in the general court environment. Article

48 of the UUPK explains that the litigation route is taken by filing a lawsuit through the

conciliation, mediation, and arbitration where the goal is to reach an agreement on the

form and amount of compensation and/or regarding certain actions to ensure that there

will be no recurrence or recurrence of losses suffered by consumers. So in practice,

conciliation is a dispute resolution taken on the initiative of one of the parties or parties,

while the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency assembly, hereinafter called BPSK, is

active so that the BPSK Assembly is only an intermediary between the parties to the

dispute. BPSK as a conciliator clarifies the problems that occur and joins amid the parties,

providing approaches to the parties even though they are not very active and completely

left to the parties and bringing together different views among the parties who must meet.

BPSK as an institution that resolves consumer disputes has the task of summoning

Noor chalimah hapsari, Rusito

in the field of consumer protection. Another way to resolve disputes outside the court is

mediation. Mediation is a process to reconcile the parties to a dispute. Mediation is an

alternative way of resolving a dispute where the parties to a dispute submit the settlement

to a mediator to obtain a fair outcome and acceptance by the parties to the dispute.

In practice, in consumer dispute resolution, mediation is a dispute resolution

process in which a third party is a neutral party and BPSK is the third party. The BPSK

Assembly is only active as an intermediary and advisor. The task of BPSK as a mediator

channels. This is the Tiket.com unilaterally canceled to the consumer due to the

government's ban on homecoming, but there are indications of a lack of honesty and

unclarity Tiket.com regarding refunds. Tiket.com said that they would refund about 6 to

14 working days, but after checking according to their promise the funds never came in.

When checking with Bank Mandiri several times, via email and phone, until consumers

came to the Bank Mandiri office, last June 4, 2021, according to them there were no

refund transactions from tiket.com. The consumer by showing evidence from Tiket.com

said it was not proof of fund transfer. Every time I asked for proof of transfer, Tiket.com

did not respond. This is the consumer who has sued for Tiket.com settlement. The

consumer asks for a settlement by mediation and has reported to BPSK. BPSK has

the form and amount of damages is left entirely to the parties, while the BPSK Council

acts actively as a mediator by providing advice, instructions, suggestions, and other

efforts in resolving disputes. Second, the results of consumer and business deliberations

are issued in the form of BPSK decisions. That the legal remedy is a form of protection

for consumers.

Tiket.com as the organizer has unilaterally canceled air tickets booked by

Aggrieved consumers have taken the non-litigation route as a form of Tiket.com

legal responsibility, by the Consumer Dispute Resolution (PSK) mechanism through

mediation. The consumer has filed a lawsuit with the BPSK (Consumer Dispute

Settlement Agency) and the BPSK has contacted Tiket.com. Tiket.com then stated that

the refund would be processed immediately to the consumer's account. The mediation

process carried out by BPSK follows the procedures regulated in Article 31 of the Decree

of the Minister of Industry No.350/MPP/Kep.12/2001. First, consumer disputes related