<![CDATA[Online fraud produces losses through interconnected communication and payment services, yet com-pensation disputes frequently isolate the victim’s final payment instruction from the institutional condi-tions that made deception actionable. This article examines how financial losses should be allocated between consumers, sending banks, receiving banks, and digital platforms in Indonesia. It employs doctrinal legal analysis and a functional comparison of Indonesian consumer and electronic-system reg-ulation with payment reimbursement in the United Kingdom, Singapore’s Shared Responsibility Framework, and Australia’s developing Scams Prevention Framework. The analysis distinguishes technical authentication, payment authorisation, institutional fault, causation, and the recovery of identifiable proceeds. It finds that existing Indonesian duties provide grounds for claims concerning defective services and institutional negligence, but should not be represented as a universal reimbursement guarantee for every scam. The article proposes a two-stage framework: accessible initial redress followed by evidence-based allocation among responsible institutions. Allocation should turn on the actor’s control over the relevant risk, breach of a specific duty, contribution to avoidable loss, and access to decisive evidence. Platform responsibility should vary with advertising, verification, transaction management, and notice-handling functions. Consumer conduct remains relevant, but valid credentials alone should not establish that the institution performed its duties. The proposed framework integrates recovery and compensation while preserving separate treatment of criminal responsibility. Its contribution is a legally bounded model of institutional loss allocation, rather than an explanation of victims’ choices of reporting channel.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
