Analisis Yuridis Perjanjian Kredit Antara PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja Tbk Dengan Nasabah Dalam Perkara Perdata No. 55K/PDT/2015

Credit Agreement between PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja. Tbk with customers is regulated in Credit Agreement No. 01 dated September 3, 2007, the agreement mentioned that there was a notification from the Bank in advance to the customer of the changes and determined the amount of interest on the credit facilities provided to customers based on the interest rates applicable to the Bank. But in practice the Bank never notifies an increase in interest rates to customers resulting in default by the customer because of delaying payments to the Bank. The formulation of the problem in this research is how the implementation of the Credit Agreement between PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja Tbk with customers in civil case No. 55K / PDT / 2015? and What are the obstacles in implementing the Credit Agreement between PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja Tbk with customers in civil case No. 55K / PDT / 2015? This type of research is normative law refers to the legal norms contained in the court's decision No. 55K / PDT / 2015 then synchronized with other rules in a hierarchical and legal theories. In this study conclusions are drawn using the inductive method that is concluded from things that are specific to things that are general. Based on the results of research and discussion of the author that the implementation of the Credit Agreement between PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja Tbk with customers in civil case No. 55K / PDT / 2015 made in the form of Credit Agreement No. 01 dated September 3, 2007, namely the Home Ownership Credit Agreement (KPR) with an interest of 12.5%, but the increase in interest rates can be reviewed every April, August, and December of each year concerned and prior notice to the debtor has the right to change and set the amount of interest on credit facilities granted to debtors is based on the interest rates applicable to the Bank. The obstacle factor in implementing the Credit Agreement between PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja Tbk with customers in civil case No. 55K / PDT / 2015, that PT. Bank Ekonomi Raharja Tbk has raised interest rates without the debtor's knowledge and there was no notification from the Bank to the debtor so that the debtor objected and delayed his payment to the Bank. Against the debtor's default has been decided by the Pekanbaru District Court, Pekanbaru High Court and the Supreme Court which decided the debtor has committed a default, so that collateral in the form of a house has been executed by the Bank. Therefore, the parties in carrying out the cooperation agreement should have good faith in order to create a balance of rights and obligations. As well as the firmness in the contents of the credit agreement in determining the notification and the fixed / flat interest rate in the home ownership loan, compensation costs and late penalty fees and cancellation of the agreement as a result of defaults in order to realize legal certainty for the parties