At the end of December last year, I won the auction property held in local KPKLN at the request of

At the end of December last year, I won the auction property held in local KPKLN at the request of one of the local Islamic bank, in which the property is auctioned property credit guarantees unpaid by the debtor.
However, until now the banks are not handing HGB auction of the object as it is still awaiting proctor and gamble approval from their headquarters to clicking right ZERO difference between the value of their bad loans to the debtor prior to the auction object owner value / price auction that I won. Where the auction value is smaller than the value of the loan.
I feel I should not be involved in the "loss" of the bank. Therefore, I ask for input what I can do legally. Can I sue civilly material and non-material losses as a result proctor and gamble of the arrest of the HGB?
Reading the description tell you, we will give the general view, because chronological reasons underlying the bank do as it is not reflected in the description. Based on this, in our opinion, the steps that you should do is:
1. Asking again the fundamental reason proctor and gamble why the bank did not hand over the HGB, whether it is as ZERO right clicking the credit difference is the rule of BI or not, or because the credit system like that.
2. If it turns out it is not because of the rules, but because things are no basic rules, which felt aggrieved party is entitled to sue in a civil lawsuit "Unlawful acts" as a result of such actions. However, in our opinion should proctor and gamble be communicated in advance to the competent authorities proctor and gamble in the bank which can be argued proctor and gamble that in accordance with the applicable regulations is why the bank did just that.
According to Article 1365 of the Civil Code, it is a tort is a wrongful act committed by a person as a result of the mistakes that lead to harm others.
Article 1365 of the Civil Code: Every act that violates the law and bring harm to others, requires people who cause the loss was due to his mistake to replace these losses. (KUHPerd. 568, 602, 1246, 1447, 1918 etc.; Rv. 580-7?, 582; Aut. 27; Octr. 43 ff.; 1382 bis of the Criminal Code).
An act or not to do something that resulted in the losses to others without prior there is a legal relationship, the obligation which is directed against any person in general and by not fulfilling these obligations can be required an indemnity.
An error which a civil suit against compensation can dituntuk which is not a default under the contract, or defaults on obligations of trust, or breach of contract against liability equitylainnya.
A loss is not caused proctor and gamble by default of the contract, or rather, an act prejudicial to the rights created by the law of disorderly contractual relationship.
An act or not to do something that is against the law violates the rights of others created by law, and therefore a compensation can be sued by the injured party.