Contenu principal de l'article
Consumer dispute resolution can be reached through court (litigation) or outside the court (non-litigation) based on the voluntary choice of the parties to the dispute. This means that consumers are given the freedom to claim their rights if they are harmed by business actors both through litigation and non-litigation. The method of approach is taken in this research is a normative juridical approach and is supported by empirical research. This research is descriptive-analytic, that is research by explaining and describing in a clear, systematic, real, and precise way of an alternative model of consumer service disputed in the financial services sector in Indonesia. The litigation process produces conflicting (adversarial) decisions that have not been able to embrace common interests, and even tends to create new problems, is slow to settle, require expensive, unresponsive costs, and create hostility among the parties to the dispute. While the non-litigation process as a model for the settlement of the consumer service sector financial disputes also still has obstacles and has not been effective. The financial service sector consumer losses can be anticipated by enforcing laws related to law enforcement and by building and developing models of financial service sector consumer dispute resolution that are currently available optimally by stakeholders so that can provide a sense of justice and guarantee legal certainty.