PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM PEMEGANG POLIS TERHADAP GAGAL BAYAR PERUSAHAAN ASURANSI JIWASRAYA (STUDI KASUS: PUTUSAN 589/PDT.G/2019/PN.JKT.PST)

Abstract

This study discusses Decision Number 589/PDT.G/2019.PN.JKT.PST the judge's consideration who did
not accept the lawsuit regarding the Jiwasraya policyholder on the grounds of not including the bank. The
problems are: 1) Can a third party outside the insurance company be drawn as a party who is also
responsible for the implementation of the policy payment obligations issued by PT Asuransi Jiwasraya
(Persero)? 2) How is the policy holder's legal protection against insurance company defaults in terms of the
Consumer Protection Act and POJK No. 1 of 2013 concerning Consumer Protection in the Financial
Services Sector? 3) How is the status of the policy in terms of government programs? The a-quo decision
was analyzed by the author using normative legal research methods. The results showed that the third
party, namely the bank and OJK, could not be drawn as the party responsible for implementing the
achievements of PT Asuransi Jiwasraya (Persero). The bancassurance agreement was made between the
bank and Jiwasraya with the approval of the OJK. The OJK's responsibility for the implementation of
achievements cannot be included because of the OJK's responsibility as a regulator and the responsibility
of the insurance company supervisor. Through this case, it can be said that UUPK and POJK No. 1 of 2013
has not provided legal protection to insurance consumers. The government's efforts to restructure the
policy have harmed policyholders, both those who agree with the restructuring and those who do not. if
Jiwasraya were to restructure, then Jiwasraya should not have harmed the policyholders. If the policy
holder does not agree with the policy restructuring, it is obligatory to announce the value set by Jiwasraya.