Uitspraak
1.De procedure
- de conclusie van antwoord in conventie, tevens eis in reconventie met producties 1 tot en met 5
- de conclusie van repliek in conventie, conclusie van antwoord in reconventie, tevens inhoudende vermindering van eis, met producties 1 tot en met 4
- de conclusie van dupliek in conventie, conclusie van repliek in reconventie met ongenummerde producties
2.De feiten
3.Het geschil
4.De beoordeling
“I would like to inform you that I have submitted a recall request to the beneficiary bank and that there is no particular time frame for the recall process. Additionally, please be aware that recalls are only performed on a ‘best endeavors’ basis as they require the co-operation of sending and receiving banks together with approval from the beneficiary. That’s why, there is no guarantee that de recall will be successful.”Op
“Hi [gedaagde in conventie, eiser in reconventie] , We have an update for your 1495 and 1495 EUR regarding your case. We have now received a response from the beneficiary bank and our callback request is rejected by them with the NOAS reason: No response from the client. This also means that the funds are with the beneficiary bank and I would ask that you please contact them directly and ask them to return the funds to your Revolut account.”(productie 4 bij conclusie van antwoord in conventie). [gedaagde in conventie, eiser in reconventie] stelt dat het voorgaande betekent dat ING contact heeft gezocht met [eiser in conventie, verweerder in reconventie] om de betalingen terug te boeken en dat [eiser in conventie, verweerder in reconventie] niet op dat verzoek gereageerd heeft. Volgens [gedaagde in conventie, eiser in reconventie] bevestigt dit dat [eiser in conventie, verweerder in reconventie] de betalingen ontvangen heeft.