We are not absent, our e-mail response time is usually under 6 hours, and at most 24 hours in exceptional cases. We simply thought that this situation was discussed already and clear for everyone and that's why we did not reply to this specific user.
My bad then, sorry! If that's the case, I misunderstood the situation. You have been very active in this thread early on, responding to most comments rather quickly so you both not responding here and to this guys email made it seem like you were absent.
I have to say that I get your point here. You could be refunding this user and tomorrow he could create another account and claim he has the private key to this note and ask for a refund aswell. That's a tricky situation.
What could be changed for the future would be that you are able to still see/download the note private key after depositing if you still have the tab open like in this case.
So basically the question is: should we refund if the user only has the guarantee letter but not the private key, or should we stick to the rule that if you lose the private key you lose access to your funds?
I would personally believe this user and make the changes mentioned above to prevent something like this from happening again. At that point it would be only the users fault if he doesn't save the private key.
I might edit this post later on after some more members stated their opinion or bring up more arguments..