Evidence on authentication and execution of payment transactionsU.K.
75.—(1) Where a payment service user—
(a)denies having authorised an executed payment transaction; or
(b)claims that a payment transaction has not been correctly executed,
it is for the payment service provider to prove that the payment transaction was authenticated, accurately recorded, entered in the payment service provider's accounts and not affected by a technical breakdown or some other deficiency in the service provided by the payment service provider.
(2) If a payment transaction was initiated through a payment initiation service provider, it is for the payment initiation service provider to prove that, within its sphere of competence, the payment transaction was authenticated, accurately recorded and not affected by a technical breakdown or other deficiency linked to the payment initiation service.
(3) Where a payment service user denies having authorised an executed payment transaction, the use of a payment instrument recorded by the payment service provider, including a payment initiation service provider where appropriate, is not in itself necessarily sufficient to prove either that—
(a)the payment transaction was authorised by the payer; or
(b)the payer acted fraudulently or failed with intent or gross negligence to comply with regulation 72 (user's obligations in relation to payment instruments and personalised security credentials).
(4) If a payment service provider, including a payment initiation service provider where appropriate, claims that a payer acted fraudulently or failed with intent or gross negligence to comply with regulation 72, the payment service provider must provide supporting evidence to the payer.