Jakarta , U3NEWS.com – Mahkmah Court (MA ) re- decide the articles forbidden to harm consumers in any agreement . Indonesian people who generally do not understand the legal language is often duped by the terms set forth in the agreement .

MA admits there are still many businesses use the articles with small letters , pages and pages and language difficulty . As a result , the agreement was to deceive the public .

” In a standard agreement , not only made ​​the sentence format that is difficult to understand , but also a lot of pages . Even the writing is written with small font , “said the Head of Legal and Public Relations MA , Mansour Ridwan , while talking to AFP on Tuesday ( 09/10/2013 ) .

The following 3 case ‘ article traps’ in the treaty that ended with the victory of the consumer :

1 . Missing Vehicle in Parking Lot

When parked , the manager gave a ticket that says less is more ‘ missing vehicles , managers are not responsible ‘ . Well , this article by MA removed for harm consumers .

Beginning of this case surfaced when Anny R Gultom and his son , Hontas Tambunan , filed suit against Secure Parking related loss of Toyota Kijang Super on March 1, 2000 . From the first to the MA level courts , parking management punish parking management to replace the loss of the vehicle .

” Standard clauses in a parking ticket is a one-sided agreement unilaterally alias . Such agreement is null and void , ” said presiding judge Jakarat Central District Court ( PN Jakpus ) Andi Samsan Nganro the verdict at the time.

This ruling followed that win cases vehicle owners . Finally, the MA punish parking management in Samarinda . Punishment meted out to the parking manager Mal Lembuswana , Samarinda , East Kalimantan ( Kaltim ) USD 17.5 million or equal to the price of motorcycle Ramdhan missing .

2 . Lost baggage in aircraft

The Supreme Court also granted the request of the lost luggage compensation exceeds the existing rules . In Article 44 paragraph 1 of Law No. 3/2000 concerning the responsibility of the carrier mentions baggage loss compensation of Rp 100 thousand per kg .

In case of loss of baggage Herlina Sunarti when riding Lion Air , MA did not heed the clause . Herlina using Lion Air from Jakarta to Semarang on August 4, 2011 .

Arriving at Ahmad Yani Airport in Semarang , Polo black bag containing cosmetics and clothing missing .

After taking legal , lion logo fly this airline should replace the missing passenger baggage of Rp 25 million .

3 . Home Purchase Agreement

This case happened to Teddy Flow Martinus Bahterawan when buying a home in Palm Residance Jambangan Housing , Surabaya , with developer PT Solid Gold in 2007 . But in 2009 , he was stuck with the article that harming him .

Clause is that ‘ … it is all the money that has been paid into the property of PT Solid Gold , and can not be prosecuted again ‘ . In SPJBR also contained the phrase ‘ … all the money that has been paid by the second party to party unity to be forfeited and can not be prosecuted again ‘ .

As a result of that clause , if Teddy cancel the purchase fined Rp 84,700,936 and if continue then fined Rp 48.888 million . Teddy was not received and wins on appeal .

Teddy felt aggrieved and sue PT Solid Gold to court over the sale and purchase agreement between them . This lawsuit was granted by the Supreme Court . MA annulled ‘ article traps’ in the agreement .

” Consumers housing for this is a ‘ victim ‘ standard clause given the inclusion of the developer assumes the dominant position of the business, ” said Commission Chairman Socialization of National Consumer Protection Agency ( BPKN ) David Tobing .