[Berdasarkan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor : 130/PMK.010/Tahun 2012 tentangpendaftaran jaminan fidusia bagi perusahaan pembiayaan yang melakukan pembiayaan konsumenuntuk kendaraan bermotor dengan pembebanan jaminan fidusia dan diperkuat oleh PeraturanOtoritas Jasa Keuangan nomor 29/POJK.05/2014 tahun 2014 tentang penyelenggaraan usahaperusahaan pembiayaan, PT. Mutiara Finance (bukan nama sebenarnya) wajib untuk mendaftarkanakta jaminan fidusia tidak lebih dari 30 (tiga puluh) hari dari tanggal perjanjian kreditnya dan PT.Mutiara Finance telah menyesuaikan Sistem Operasional Prosedur (SOP) tentang fidusia. Namun,notaris lalai dalam memenuhi SOP tersebut walaupun sebelumnya telah diinformasikan danmenyetujui akan perubahan SOP tentang fidusia. Untuk itu, notaris melanggar pasal 16 Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) dan pasal 3 Kode Etik Notaris. Perlindungan hukum terhadappenerima fidusia dalam kasus ini lemah namun notaris dapat dikenakan sanksi karena melanggarUUJN, kode etik dan wanprestasi terhadap perjanjian. Hasil penelitian ini bersifat eksplanatorisanalitis karena penulis ingin menjelaskan objek penelitian yang lebih mendalam dari akibat hukumterhadap penerima fidusia atas keterlambatan pendaftaran akta jaminan fidusia.;Based on Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor : 130/PMK.010/Tahun 2012 aboutFiduciary Registration for Finance Company that conducted consumer financing on motor vehiclewith the imposition of fiduciary and strengthen by Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan nomor29/POJK.05/2014 tahun 2014 about organizing finance company, PT. Mutiara Finance (not realname) is obliged to register fiduciary deed no more than 30 (thirty) days since credit agreement’sdate and PT. Mutiara Finance have conformed their System Operational Procedure (SOP) aboutfiduciary. However, the notary was negligent in fulfilling said SOP despite being informed beforeand have accepted the Fiduciary SOP conformation. Therefore, the Notary violated act 16 ofUndang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) and act 3 of Kode Etik Notaris. Legal protection forfiduciary recipient in this case is poor but notary can be punished because notary violated UUJN,kode etik and default. The result of this study will be analytical explanatory because the writerwants to describe the study object more deeply about legal consequences for fiduciary recipientsdue to late registration of fiduciary deeds, Based on Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor : 130/PMK.010/Tahun 2012 aboutFiduciary Registration for Finance Company that conducted consumer financing on motor vehiclewith the imposition of fiduciary and strengthen by Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan nomor29/POJK.05/2014 tahun 2014 about organizing finance company, PT. Mutiara Finance (not realname) is obliged to register fiduciary deed no more than 30 (thirty) days since credit agreement’sdate and PT. Mutiara Finance have conformed their System Operational Procedure (SOP) aboutfiduciary. However, the notary was negligent in fulfilling said SOP despite being informed beforeand have accepted the Fiduciary SOP conformation. Therefore, the Notary violated act 16 ofUndang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) and act 3 of Kode Etik Notaris. Legal protection forfiduciary recipient in this case is poor but notary can be punished because notary violated UUJN,kode etik and default. The result of this study will be analytical explanatory because the writerwants to describe the study object more deeply about legal consequences for fiduciary recipientsdue to late registration of fiduciary deeds]