In the practice of Home Ownership Loans (KPR), a sale agreement between the buyer and the seller creates a legal relationship between the parties. This legal relationship creates rights and obligations that each party must fulfil. However, there are still various problems in its implementation, especially in the subsidized housing program with the Home Finance Liquidity Facility (FLPP) scheme aimed at the low-income community (MBR). Based on a report from the World Bank, many subsidized housing units are considered to meet the standard of habitability.

Facts on the ground show that many subsidized housing units are uninhabited and face various problems, ranging from a less strategic location, limited accessibility, to poor building quality. In addition, inadequate basic infrastructure, poor construction quality, and lack of access to electricity and clean water are also hindering factors. The conditions of the situation pose a challenge for the Indonesian government in determining decent housing for people with low incomes. As stated in the Consumer Protection Law No. 8 of 1999, the state is responsible for protecting all Indonesian people by providing housing and residential areas that allow people to live in decent homes, reaching, safe, harmonious, and sustainable in all regions of Indonesia. Based on the above issues, this study will discuss the legal protection of the beneficiaries in the sale of subsidized houses, especially those related to the quality of livable dwellings. In addition, this investigation also aims to identify various violations of legal norms experienced by the defendant in the agreement to sell subsidized houses.

Legal protection for consumers when selling a house is crucial, remembering that the house is not only a basic need for each individual, but also involves a considerable financial investment. In the relationship between consumers and businesses, both parties must carry out their rights and obligations to ensure that transactions are conducted fairly, transparently, and in compliance with applicable legal regulations. However, there are still cases of law violations in the sale of houses, such as delays in the delivery of units that are not under the agreement, and land ownership that is not under the contract. Considering the impact of consumer behavior in these high-value transactions, legal protection is not only intended to create a sense of security and legal certainty, but also to encourage consumers to carry out their responsibilities professionally and in a manner that is consistent with their needs. Consumers must also behave responsibly and be vigilant to avoid becoming victims of

irresponsible predators. Consumers must conduct an independent assessment to prevent fraud by the consumer (Sedana et al., 2021).

Based on the author's knowledge, until now, several legal journals still provide consumer protection related to the sale of subsidized livable houses. The writing of this journal has a different character from that of existing journal writing, and the results of writing that raise the title of consumer protection issues will be the same. Still, the writing results are not the same. A paper in a journal created by Be$rliana Ayu K from Airlangga University entitled Legal Protection for Subsidized Houses in the Sale Agreement of Subsidized Houses Related to the Quality of Habitable Houses, which focuses its research on the legal protection of subsidized houses in the construction of subsidized houses. Speaking to the journal Urip Santoso Parame, the Group on Housing Law, which emphasizes the regulation of housing law in housing and residential areas, Muhammad Anie has provided legal protection for consumers over the ownership of houses from developers in Makassar City. Describing the specification of the technology that ensures the quality and reliability of the building for consumers, Gle$ry Lazuardi describes uninhabitable subsidized houses by the World Bank, which focuses on the quality of livable dwellings, which will later become a correction for livable housing entrepreneurs. Still, our journal is different from other journals, which focus on the legal responsibility of business owners while discussing how consumers can make efforts to avoid losses and misrepresentations from the developer.

Based on the background information, the author intends to investigate the matter in relation to the problem of violations against consumers in the sale of subsidized houses in order to avoid fraud by the business owner in the sale of houses.

Legal liability is a legal concept that states that every person or party who commits a legal act, especially to the point of causing harm to another party, must be responsible for his or her actions. In this context, responsibility can include the obligation to compensate for damages, repair the situation, or comply with legal sanctions.

In a similar way, legal liability arises when there is an element of violation of the law or a legal obligation that is committed. In this case, the perpetrator will be held accountable for his actions or omissions, whether in a technical, criminal, or administrative way, depending on the nature of the violation (Sukmana, 2016). Claims for losses experienced by consumers as a result of the use of products, both in the form of material, physical, or mental losses, can be based on several provisions that have been mentioned. These provisions generally only have two categories: claims for damages based on default and claims for damages based on unlawful acts (Miru and Yodo, 2004).

In the context of consumer protection, especially in the sale of a house, the concept of legal responsibility is used to assess whether the buyer or seller has fulfilled their obligations in accordance with the agreements and regulations that apply, under Law Number 8 of 1999 on Consumer Protection. In the sale of a house, the business owner (usually a developer or dean) is obliged to sell the house by the specifications, time, and other conditions agreed upon in the sale agreement. The business owner can be held legally liable if there is negligence or malpractice, such as a delay in construction, improper building specifications, or a hidden defect. Every company must have corporate social responsibility, namely the company's concern and moral commitment to the interests of the community, regardless of the calculation of the company's profits and losses, where the form of responsibility is the company's responsibility for the welfare of the environment and society (Sumardi and Supriyanto, 1987). The legal responsibility of business owners in the agreement to sell subsidized houses is based on the Consumer Protection Law number 8 of 1999, articles 4, 7, and 9. This article refers to the legal certainty of the safety, convenience, consumer safety, and the right to information that is related to the responsibility of the business operator to compensate for damages, losses, and/or injuries caused by consumers due to the consumption of goods and/or services produced or traded (Eprint, 2024).

This legal responsibility is based on the purpose of creating justice and legal certainty while also protecting the aggrieved party. Therefore, understanding this theory is very useful for analyzing cases between consumers and business owners in the transaction of selling a house.

The mechanism for selling subsidized houses cannot be removed from the market because it is like a pawn for a certain amount of money. Within the constitutional framework, the Indonesian Public Unity, as stated in the 1945 Constitution, is directed to become a state of affairs. Basically, the concept of national security means that a state not only functions to carry out its defense, but also has the responsibility to ensure a minimum of safety for all its citizens.

Along with efforts to address the issue of poverty, there has been a demand for the government to intervene in various aspects of social life, including housing. This interest is realized through the regulation of regulation or legal regulation that protects vulnerable groups of people, in this case, people who generate income from the domination of groups that have the power in the economy. The aim is to create social justice and ensure the enjoyment of the fundamental right to decent housing for all levels of society.

The housing subsidy program organized by the government is one of the efforts to assist the Income Tax Society (MBR) in finding suitable housing. In its implementation, several houses have been built and provided through this program, while the rest are still in the planning stage or only in the form of replicas and visual illustrations as a visual representation of future housing. The government in this case does not work alone. Instead, it works with the developer to re-realize the construction of subsidized housing and determine the mechanism for its implementation.

However, when building a new system, several problems, both technical and non-technical, are often associated with cheating practices. This can lead to a developer's breach of promises, which ultimately harms consumers and home buyers. Adequate legal protection is required to ensure consumer rights in this context.

Referring to Article 2 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection (UUPK), consumer protection is an integral part of national development, which is in line with five main principles, namely:

Besides these principles, it is hoped that consumer protection in the sale of subsidized houses can be done effectively and fairly. In the context of the ownership of a home by the developer, legal protection provides a legal framework to ensure fairness in transactions between the parties involved in the sale of a house. This legal protection not only functions as a guarantee of legal certainty for the parties, but also as an instrument to protect the rights of consumers, especially in terms of the use of housing that should be enjoyed optimally under the agreement.

Legal protection for consumers in the case of homeownership includes a mechanism for complaints arising from violations of individual rights. The scope

of consumer protection can be divided into two aspects: protection against the possibility of goods being handed over to consumers not in accordance with what was agreed upon, and protection against the imposition of unfair conditions for consumers. Violations can take the form of slightly below-standard building quality, land areas that do not comply with the agreement, and various other violations that harm consumers. In addition to violations of individual rights, there are also violations of the collective rights of consumers, who should also be protected (Meialana, 1993).

In practice, not a few consumers of subsidized houses feel disadvantaged. Many high-income people depend on this program to get a decent living space. However, the realization in the field of rap was not as promised. Many of the problems being investigated include water quality unsuitable for consumption, inadequate environmental conditions, such as mud roads, basic facilities, such as wells, or water unsuitable for bathrooms. In addition, the quality of the building, which is far from the specifications promised in advertisements and promotional brochures, is evidence of the incompatibility between the initial agreement and the real conditions. This behavior can be categorized as a breach of promise or a breach of promise, which in a legal way provides a basis for consumers to demand liability.

To minimize the risk of fraud, consumers should understand the transaction stages and ensure that the legal relationship between the buyer and the seller is established in a mutual agreement. One of the most important agreements is the Sale of Goods (PPJB) agreement, which binds the two parties to enter into a final sale agreement. The PPJB implementation guidelines are regulated through the Minister of Public Housing No. 09/KPTS/M/1995 on the Guidelines for the Binding Sale of Houses (Leo, 2020). Which is a reference to the practice of selling houses by the developers.

Furthermore, the legal basis that consumers can use to demand the developer's responsibility can be found in Law Number 1 of 2011 concerning Housing and Residential Areas. Article 134 in conjunction with Article 151 of the law states that a person who commits a violation can be fined up to Rp5,000,000,000.00 (five billion rupiah). In addition to the sanctions, there are administrative sanctions as stipulated in Article 150, ranging from written warnings, suspensions of activities, revocation of business licenses, and closure of business operations.

A house sale agreement between a developer and a buyer is a data protection agreement, in which one of the parties bears responsibility for himself or herself or for another party involved in a legal relationship. In contract theory, the process of an agreement is divided into three phases, namely:

In the practice of selling houses, the concept of this agreement is crucial because it involves many aspects, such as the price of the house, the time of the house, the specification of the building, the quality of the land, and so on. This agreement becomes the legal basis if the day arises. For example, if the developer is too late to hand over the house or the building specifications are not suitable, then the consumer can sue based on the content of the agreement that has been agreed.

The terms of the agreement also establish the principle of freedom of contract, which means that the parties to the agreement must determine the content of the agreement as long as it is not contrary to law, public order, and morality. However, when selling a house, the consumer is often in a position of power because the buyer usually prepares the agreement's content. Therefore, legal protection of consumers is a way to reduce the imbalance of rights and obligations (Rivaldi and Supriatna, 2023).

In the context of selling a house, a violation of the law by the business owner in the agreement to sell a home can occur when the developer does not fulfill its obligations as agreed. Depending on the number of violations, this violation of the law can be categorized as a violation of the law or an act against the law.

A default occurs when one of the parties does not implement the agreement's content as it should. For example, business sellers or deputies may be late in handing over the house to consumers, the house built does not match the brochure drawings or technical specifications, or the house is not built at the same time, even though the consumer has paid the down payment. These things violate the agreement and can cause losses for consumers.

For example, unlawful acts can occur if the business owner's actions cause losses to consumers, even if they are not directly related to the content of the agreement. For example, if a business owner sells a house on land that is still in the same land or does not have a property, then it can be considered an act against the law because it violates the rights and legal security of consumers.

Based on Article 19 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning the Consumer Protection Act (UUPK), business owners who violate the law and harm consumers are required to pay compensation. This compensation can be in the form of a refund, a product replacement, or a company replacement. This is a legal liability for negligent or fraudulent business owners who run their businesses.

security when making transactions to sell houses (Ayu, 2022).

Furthermore, the protection of consumer rights in a general way is regulated in Article 4 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning the Consumer Protection Act (UUPK), which includes:

With the introduction of regulation and legal enforcement, it is hoped that consumers, especially those who own subsidized housing, will receive comprehensive protection in the transaction process while encouraging the developer to be accountable for providing decent housing in line with the standards set.

The most common problems in implementing subsidized house sale agreements are related to consumer protection aspects, especially the limitation of the choice of Home Ownership Credit (KPR) products. Consumers are advised to choose a home unit without considering or comparing financing products appropriate to their financial condition. Since the bank has been given exclusive access to the same business through the Equal Partnership Agreement (PKS), consumers are only provided limited access to mortgage products from the central bank (Faisal, 2024).

Consumers are divided into three categories, namely, commercial consumers, intermediate consumers, and end consumers (Nasution, 2022). In principle, consumers should have the right to make choices without coercion, either directly or indirectly. However, in this context, consumers' position is weakened due to their lack of financing alternatives. This imbalance in position can have a negative impact, as it allows the business owner to exploit the

consumer through unfair business practices and the risk of loss borne by the consumer due to the business owner's unilateral policy.

Not only are consumers harmed, but business leaders can also experience negative impacts, such as decreased product quality and the emergence of unequal business competition. Another problem contributing to consumers' position is the lack of information provided by the mortgage scheme offered by banks. As a result, consumers often have a limited understanding of mortgage mechanisms, including the number of installments that must be paid every month.

For example, promotional materials such as brochures and other media generally only display a site plan or master plan that describes the long-term plan of the building, such as the construction of public facilities, without providing information that would be sufficient to support the financing aspects. This strategy is aimed at attracting consumer interest rather than providing a comprehensive understanding of the rights and obligations of the subsidized house.

Article 7 of the Consumer Protection Law (UUPK) is regulated in a way that determines the obligations that must be fulfilled by business owners, especially in the context of the development of goods and/or services (Supriatiningsih, 2016). Responsibilities include:

If one of the parties to the agreement, the business or consumer, does not fulfill its obligations as stipulated in the regulations, the aggrieved party has the right to demand the revocation of its rights. A breach of a duty can result in damages that require the negligent party to be held legally liable. With this deception, this re-regulation provides legal protection to consumers and encourages business owners to carry out their business activities ethically and professionally.

Business owners, in this case developers, are taking strategic steps in developing subsidized housing as part of a government program to support

people's access to affordable housing for homeowners. However, in practice, it is not uncommon to find various violations committed by developers, such as building quality that is not up to the promised standards, damage to the building structure, technical specifications that deviate from the contract, and negligence in the provision of basic facilities that are the rights of consumers.

These problems create a sense of distrust and concern among people who do not want to buy subsidized housing. This is because the agreement to sell a subsidized house is not only related to the contractual aspect but also to consumer protection, which in this case is somewhat in a better economic position than that of the business owner.

In the context of legal protection, consumers have various rights as stipulated in Article 4 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning the Consumer Protection Act (UUPK), including the right to comfort, security, and convenience in using goods and/or services; the right to submit complaints and complaints; and the right to compensation if the goods and/or services received are not under the agreement or the contract (Maharani and Dzikra, 2021).

If the developer infringes on consumers' rights, consumers have two main paths to redress a claim: non-litigation and litigation mechanisms. The non- litigation route can be achieved by filing a complaint with the Consumer Protection Agency (BPSK), as stipulated in Article 52 of the UUPK. The Consumer Dispute Resolution Agency (BPSK) is a body tasked with handling and resolving disputes between business actors and consumers (Article 1 number 11 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection). BPSK can resolve consumer disputes through mediation, conciliation, and arbitration based on the principles of fairness and reach. As a consumer dispute resolution body outside the court, BPSK's decision is final and binding, without appeals or cassation efforts (Article 54 paragraph (3) of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning the protection of consumers).

If the consumer through BPSK does not produce results or is dissatisfied, then the consumer can take the litigation route through the court. Based on Article 45, paragraph (1) and Article 46 of the UUPK, consumers can file a lawsuit with the court in the jurisdiction where the consumer lives. In a lawsuit, consumers can claim damages based on negligence or unlawful acts, as Article 19 of the UUPK stipulates. Article 1 states, "Business owners are responsible for compensating for damages, losses, and/or losses to consumers due to consuming goods and/or services produced or traded." The compensation in question can be a refund, replacement of goods, or other compensation agreed upon.

In addition to data protection responsibilities, business operators can also be subject to criminal sanctions if they are proven to have committed serious violations, such as fraud or disclosing misleading information. This law is regulated in Article 62 paragraph (1) of the UUPK, which states that "Business owners who violate the laws as referred to in Articles 8 to 17 are threatened with imprisonment for a maximum of five (5) years or a maximum penalty of Rp2,000,000,000.00 (two billion rupiah)."(Novianti, 2021).

With demystification, consumer protection in selling subsidized houses requires careful attention, both from the regulatory and implementation aspects, to ensure that consumer rights are protected efficiently and fairly.

To avoid any breach of the promised house or violation of rights, consumers can make several efforts to avoid being deceived by departures in the sale agreement of the house (Firmansyah, 2023):

In the practice of buying a house, consumers are faced with various forms of fraud or violation of their rights. Therefore, consumers must be more careful in choosing the right product to avoid a loss.

By implementing these measures, consumers are expected to be protected from harmful practices and to fully exercise their rights when selling a home.

Seeing the rampant defaults committed by developers in implementing the subsidized Home Ownership Credit (KPR) program, efforts are needed from various parties to prevent greater losses among low-income people (MBR).

With the consistent implementation of these steps, it is hoped that the implementation of the subsidized mortgage program can run fairly, transparently, and truly in the best interests of the community as the main beneficiary.