5 Amendments of Bogdan RZOŃCA related to 2023/0210(COD)
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where a payment service user denies having authorised an executed payment transaction or claims that the payment transaction was not correctly executed, the burden shall be on the payment service provider to prove that the payment transaction wasfollowed required authentification and authorised, was accurately recorded, entered in the accounts and not affected by a technical breakdown or some other deficiency of the service provided by the payment service provider. Until other evidence is collected and properly assesed, the payment service provider is entitled to treat the tramsaction as authorised and correctly executed.
Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
If the payment transaction is initiated through a payment initiation service provider, the burden shall be on the payment initiation service provider to prove that within its sphere of competence, the payment transaction was authorised,followed required authentification and was accurately recorded and not affected by a technical breakdown or other deficiency linked to the payment service of which it is in charge. Until other evidence is collected and properly assesed, the payment service is entitled to treat the transaction as authorised and correctly executed.
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 2
2. 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 the payment initiation service provider as appropriate, shall in itself not necessarily be sufficient to prove either that the payment transaction was authorised by the payer or that the payer acted fraudulently or failed with intent or gross negligence to fulfil one or more of the obligations under Article 52. The payment service provider, including, where appropriate, the payment initiation service provider, shall provide supporting evidence to prove fraud or gross negligence on part of the payment service user.
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 1
1. Where a payment services user who is a consumer was manipulated by a third party pretending to be an employee of the consumer’s payment service provider using the name orand e-mail address or name and telephone number of that payment service provider unlawfully and that manipulation gave rise to subsequent fraudulent authorised payment transactions, the payment service provider shall refund the consumer the full amount of the fraudulent authorised payment transaction under the condition that the consumer has, without any delay, reported the fraud to the police and notified its payment service provider.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Within 10 business days after noting or being notified of the fraudulent authorised payment transaction and provided that the consumer has reported the fraud to the police as provided under paragraph 1, the payment service provider shall do either of the following: