Investment Alert Task Force Closes Nearly 700 Illegal Fintechs in the First Half of 2020

The Investment Alert Task Force (SWI) revealed that it had closed 694 illegal in the first half of 2020. Compared to last year alone, this figure is already almost half of the number of companies that closed SW amounted to 1493 companies.

The momentum of the pandemic has become an opportunity for illegal players to develop more wildly, as can be seen from the number that has doubled compared to before the pandemic. SWI noted that during March-June 2020 it had closed 574 illegal companies. As for January alone there were 120 companies. When totaled cumulatively from 2018 until now, SWI has closed 2591 entities.

"With technological advances that make it easier for people to create applications, share SMS, fintech This illegal activity is becoming increasingly difficult to eradicate. So what we routinely do every day is cyber patrol with Kemenkominfo before falling victim again," explained the Chairman of the Investment Alert Task Force, Tongam L. Tobing, in a press conference online, Monday (13/7).

He elaborated further on the SWI findings, fintech The illegal has the majority of servers from abroad. Servers from undetected locations reached 44%, then from the United States (14%), Singapore (8%), China (6%), Malaysia (2%), others (3%), and the rest from within the country (22%).

Whole fintech According to him, this does not carry out borrowing and borrowing money like what the company does p2p loans registered with the OJK. They actually act more or less like a finance company (multi-finance). In addition, the majority of complaints received are from the borrower's side, not the lender.

"From the funding side, no one has ever complained. The complainants are victims who are often tricked because the requirements often change, the fines are unlimited, and there are acts of intimidation when they are unable to pay," he added.

In carrying out this closing activity, SWI claimed to have coordinated with various related parties, ranging from banking, inter-ministerial, police, to Google. With banking, for example, SWI asks to block accounts that are detected as making suspected transactions and are not serving before pocketing a registered certificate from the OJK.

AFPI Head of Public Relations and Institutions Tumbur Pardede reminded the public that before making a loan, it was necessary to ensure that the party offering the loan online has a permit from the competent authority in accordance with the business activities carried out.

“What is legal must be registered with the OJK and already a member of the AFPI. AFPI is an official association and OJK's partners have the authority to impose sanctions on members if they are proven to have violated the rules and code of ethics," said Tumbur.

Difficulty because there is no legal umbrella

Tongam admitted that in practice the perpetrators took advantage of loopholes in the legal vacuum. The legal instruments needed include the absence of a Fintech Law to ensnare the illegal and the dissemination of personal data and unethical billing with the Criminal Code, the ITE Law, and others.

From the victim's side, they tend not to report to the police, instead preferring to report to social media which will not actually have a deterrent effect for the perpetrators. fintech illegal. Even from the side of SWI itself, it is difficult to record the valid value of economic losses for the state from potential taxes that have managed to escape from the state. Also real data on the number of borrowers and investors were not obtained.

Next, from the side of law enforcement there is no priority for handling cases. The legal process is more towards desk collection. In addition, court costs are not commensurate with the losses suffered by consumers. "The loss is in the community, apart from material loss, there is also psychological loss because they are terrorized and intimidated during collection."

Preventive steps that can be taken by the community in knowing the characteristics of , among others not registered with OJK; interest and loan term is not clear; the borrowing address is unclear and names change frequently; The media used does not only use applications, but also download links that are distributed via SMS or listed on the perpetrator's website.

Next, there is the dissemination of the borrower's personal data; and lastly, the collection procedure is not only to the borrower, but also to family, co-workers, to superiors, spreading slander, threats, to sexual harassment, and usually billing before the due date.