Validity of Mortgage Rights Based on Credit Agreement Aspects
Abstract
Mortgage is an important part of civil law in economic legal activities. There are four stages of the interweaving of law in this relationship, namely pre-agreement, agreement, authorization of implementation, and the elimination of mortgage. In all these phases, creditors and debtors have equal rights, because the relationship between them is consensual (balanced law) because the parties assume ownership of each other. But in the practice of mortgage rights so far, the creditor takes a dominative position so that the application of the procedure does not provide justice to the debtor. This study provides answers about how to formulate legal renewal so that the relationship of mortgage rights can be intertwined on the basis and principles of procedural justice. This type of research is explanatory, with its empirical normative nature, using sources of normative legal materials and expert opinions. It is hoped that the output of this research is to guarantee academic honesty and provide empirical benefits, which is to be a source of strengthening and law-making for the mortgage and financial rights in Indonesia.
Keywords: mortgage, credit, agreement
References
[1] Dosi G, Pereira MC, Roventini A, Virgillito ME. What if supply-side policies are not enough? The perverse interaction of flexibility and austerity. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:360–88.
[2] Yun TS, Jeong D, Park S. ‘Too central to fail’ systemic risk measure using PageRank algorithm. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:251–72.
[3] Verhoef ET. Cost recovery of congested infrastructure under market power. J Urban Econ. 2017 Sep;101:45–56.
[4] Dröes MI, Hassink WH. House price risk and the hedging benefits of home ownership. J Hous Econ. 2013 Jun;22(2):92–9.
[5] Bosquet C, Combes PP. Sorting and agglomeration economies in French economics departments. J Urban Econ. 2017 Sep;101:27–44.
[6] Whitaker S, Fitzpatrick TJ 4th. Deconstructing distressed-property spillovers: the effects of vacant, tax-delinquent, and foreclosed properties in housing submarkets. J Hous Econ. 2013 Jun;22(2):79–91.
[7] Li W, Oswald F. Recourse and residential mortgages: the case of Nevada. J Urban Econ. 2017 Sep;101:1–13.
[8] Chan S, Gedal M, Been V, Haughwout A. The role of neighborhood characteristics in mortgage default risk: evidence from New York City. J Hous Econ. 2013 Jun;22(2):100–18.
[9] de Palma A, Lindsey R, Monchambert G. The economics of crowding in rail transit. J Urban Econ. 2017 Sep;101:106–22.
[10] Karikari JA. Why homeowners’ documentation went missing under the Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP)?: an analysis of strategic behavior of homeowners and servicers. J Hous Econ. 2013 Jun;22(2):146–62.
[11] Chabé-Ferret B. Adherence to cultural norms and economic incentives: evidence from fertility timing decisions. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:24–48.
[12] Morganti P, Garofalo G. “Reassessing the law, finance, and growth nexus after the recent Great recession.” J. Econ. Behav. Organ., vol. 162, no. September 2017, pp. 229–250, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.12.020..
[13] Kettlewell N. Risk preference dynamics around life events. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:66–84.
[14] Yoshimoto H, Nakabayashi J. Search and resale frictions in a two-sided online platform: A case of multi-use assets. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:85–105.
[15] Ertac S, Gümren M, Koçkesen L. Strategic feedback in teams: theory and experimental evidence. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:1–23.
[16] Haller H, Hoyer B. The common enemy effect under strategic network formation and disruption. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162(160364472):146–63.
[17] Caiani A, Catullo E, Gallegati M. The effects of alternative wage regimes in a monetary union: A multi-country agent based-stock flow consistent model. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:389–416.
[18] Krustev G. The natural rate of interest and the financial cycle. J Econ Behav Organ. 2019;162:193–210.