The house is one of basic necessities as well as rights that can be possessed by every person to obtain

adequate housing as stipulated in Article 28 letter h paragraph (1) of the 1t945Constitution. The

development of housing business becomes a gap for the developer to undertake harmful actions the

consumer, in the advertisement mentioned that the house is a subsidized house, but in fact the house is

not a subsidized house provided by the Local Government. The purpose of this study to determine the

accountability of business actors to consumers for losses suffered due misleading information on the

sale of house in Bantul District and the name of Regional Government as a party to the subsidy. The

research method use is empirical law research. Data obtained by way of giving questionnaires,

interviews and using literature book. From the analysis that has been done, shows that consumers

receive compensation of the refund of Rp.1.500.000 but the compensation to Regional Government as

a party to the subsidy is not implemented. Accountability in the case has not arisen because the

Government of Bantul Regency is passive and does not file a lawsuit for this profiteering.