If the authorisation of a payment transaction that has been carried out is disputed, the payment service provider is to prove that authentication took place and that the payment transaction was properly recorded and posted and was not impaired by a malfunction. Authentication is deemed to have taken place if the payment service provider has verified the use of a specific payment instrument, including its personalised security features, with the aid of a procedure. If the payment transaction was initiated using a payment instrument, the recording of the use of the payment instrument, including authentication, by the payment service provider and, as the case may be, by a payment initiation service provider, is not necessarily sufficient by itself in order to prove that the payer
1. authorised the payment transaction,
2. acted with fraudulent intent,
3. violated one or several obligations under section 675l (1), or
4. intentionally or with gross negligence violated one or several conditions for the issuance and use of the payment instrument.
The payment service provider must submit supporting evidence in order to prove fraud, intent or gross negligence on the part of the payment service user.