<![CDATA[This study examines dispute resolution mechanisms available to lenders against operators of Information Technology-Based Joint Funding Services (LPBBTI) that fail to disclose required funding information, as well as the role of the Financial Services Authority (OJK) in resolving such disputes. The research employs a normative legal method using statute, case, and comparative approaches. Findings reveal that OJK Regulation No. 40 of 2024 does not comprehensively regulate dispute resolution mechanisms for compensating formal and/or material losses suffered by lenders due to operators' failure to fulfill disclosure obligations. OJK's authority is limited to imposing administrative sanctions without any mechanism for restoring lenders' rights. These findings are analyzed through preventive and repressive legal protection theory and compared with U.S. peer-to-peer lending regulation under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Supreme Court Decision No. 1206 K/Pdt/2024, ordering OJK to develop comprehensive consumer protection regulations, further underscores the urgency of reform. This study recommends revising POJK No. 40 of 2024 to integrate compensation mechanisms, alternative dispute resolution, and mandatory guarantee funds for LPBBTI operators. Keywords: Dispute Resolution, Lender Protection. LPBBTI, OJK.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
