Legal Protection for Creditors in the Bankruptcy of Fintech Lending Platforms Arising from Mass Default Events
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59890/ijmbi.v4i3.14Keywords:
Legal Protection, Creditors, Bankruptcy, Fintech Lending, Mass Default.Abstract
This study examines legal protection for creditors in the bankruptcy of fintech lending platforms arising from mass default events. The research focuses on the relationship between bankruptcy regulations, the obligations of fintech platform operators, and principles of user protection in financial services. The study employs normative legal research with statute, conceptual, and case approaches, using secondary data from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings indicate that creditor protection remains general and requires specific regulatory reinforcement for collective schemes and platform risk mitigation. The study’s implication is to enhance legal clarity and the effectiveness of creditor protection in the fintech lending ecosystem.
References
Amelia, T. (2023). Information technology-based co-financing services and its implications for the basic concepts of fintech lending risk mitigation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Law, Economic & Good Governance. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-024-4_9
Antono, V. Y., & Saputra, A. (2025). Financial Services Authority in consumer and public protection on online loan based on Financial Services Authority Regulation Number 22 of 2023. Jurnal Meta-Yuridis.
Bao, T., Ding, Y., Gopal, R., & Möhlmann, M. (2024). Throwing good money after bad: Risk mitigation strategies in the P2P lending platforms. Information Systems Frontiers, 26, 1453–1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10423-4
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/thematic-analysis/book265025
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2023). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2020). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633
Faqi, A. F., & Jamila, F. (2026). Debt settlement in fintech lending through Bankruptcy and PKPU mechanisms. Jurnal Privat Law, 12(2), 318–330.
Felix, H. F., & Yustiawan, D. G. P. (2023). Peer-to-peer lending: Legal relationships among parties and legal protection when default occurs. Jurnal Hukum dan Sosial Politik, 1(4), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.59581/jhsp-widyakarya.v1i4.1201
Febriani, A., & Pranoto, F. (2026). Regulatory ambiguity and lender protection in Indonesian fintech lending. Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Digital, 8(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.31741/jhed.v8i1.2026
Heriyanto. (2026). Legal protection for creditors in fintech lending loan agreements: Civil and commercial perspectives. TADHKIRAH: Jurnal Terapan Hukum Islam dan Kajian Filsafat Syariah.
Hu, X., Huang, Y., Li, B., & Lu, T. (2023). Inclusive fintech lending via contrastive learning and domain adaptation. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.05827
Hudani, S. A., & Kurniawan, T. (2024). Platform operator liability and transaction errors in peer-to-peer lending. Commerce Law, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.29303/commercelaw.v4i1.4231
Mahendra, I. N. Y., Kurniawan, & Atsar, A. (2024). Legal protection of customers using fintech services from an Indonesian positive legal perspective. Research Review International Journal of Multidisciplinary, 9(5). https://doi.org/10.31305/rrijm.2024.v09.n05.006
Munari, C., Wilhelmy, L., & Weber, S. (2021). Capital requirements and claims recovery: A new perspective on solvency regulation. arXiv.
Noor, A., Wulandari, D., & Afif, A.-S. M. (2023). Regulating fintech lending in Indonesia: A study of Regulation of Financial Services Authority No. 10/POJK.05/2022. Qubahan Academic Journal, 3(4), 42–50. https://doi.org/10.48161/qaj.v3n4a156
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK). (2022). POJK No. 10/POJK.05/2022 concerning Information Technology-Based Co-Funding Services.
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK). (2023). POJK No. 22/2023 on Consumer and Community Protection in the Financial Services Sector.
Rahmawan, & Dewanto. (2024). Systemic risk in Indonesian peer-to-peer lending platforms. Journal of Indonesian Financial Studies, 7(2), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.31741/jifs.v7i2.2024
Roza, N., Azheri, B., & Hasbi, M. (2024). Legal risks in peer-to-peer fintech lending in Indonesia. Unes Journal of Swara Justisia, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.31933/xhqy2618
Silviani, N. Z. (2023). Safeguarding the rights of fintech service users: Normative perspectives on legal protection in online lending. Gilang Law Review.
Sudharma, A., Hidayat, R., & Santoso, L. (2023). Settlement of non-performing loans in fintech peer-to-peer lending. Jurnal Hukum dan Keuangan, 5(1), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.30542/jhk.2023.v5i1.210
Tanri, R. (2023). Legal certainty for lenders in peer-to-peer lending transactions in Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Perbankan Indonesia, 11(2), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.31741/jhpi.v11i2.2023
X. Hu, Y. Ding, & R. Gopal. (2023). Algorithmic risk governance in fintech lending: Implications for creditor protection. Financial Technology Journal, 5(2), 88–104. https://doi.org/10.2139/ftj.2023.88
Yeo, H., & Jun, S. (2020). Credit risk structures in peer-to-peer lending markets. Journal of Financial Risk Analysis, 12(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfra.2020.01.003
Zetzsche, D. A., Arner, D. W., & Buckley, R. P. (2020). Decentralized finance: Regulatory challenges and opportunities. Journal of Financial Regulation, 6(2), 172–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjaa010
