@Cheaternl#261179 That being said, you provided new information. You wrote that you had 30 accounts of which 7 connects without the extra charge. According to the model that was interpreted, you should have been charged.
This could mean that bunq changed this 'business rule' and started counting differently, but before we go into that, let's unpack what you mean.
At the moment of writing there is no counter inside the app. There is also no history log of the number of active sub-accounts or connects. The number 23+7 is counted by your hand, correct?
(This is about information, not about me trusting you or not.)
How do you determine in an absoluut way that you have had those sub-accounts active/linked in 2021?
Can we read at which date a certain sub-account is opened?
Can we read at which date a certain sub-account is connected? (For example, when you disconnect an incoming connected sub-account (the tile disappears), but it will leave a line* inside the log with all transactions. So one can infer the date on which a sub-account is disconnected.
However, this *line reads "Access to [sub]account was removed.", cannot be searched, only found by scrolling.
Since this was recent for me I can find it by scrolling, but how do we determine when a connect was established? Scrolling back further? Or is there a date on the connection page?
Additionally, as far as I have seen, we cannot read in the app when a sub-account was closed/archived.
So how do we determine with absoluut certainty (from our user-side in the bunq app) that one was above the 25 limit, without an extra charge?
I think it is hard, near impossible. If we could, we could present our findings to the moderators or support and ask why this rule of was changed suddenly. But then what?
The outcome of this could be: that was a bug, we meant to count connects, but it was a mistake we didn't. We corrected that mistake and started counting them and henceforth bill users.
Because including or excluding incoming connects can be explained both ways as the logical way, it is a grey area what is the "right way".
Personally I think informing your users of additional significant costs before they make them is a requirement regardless of what you include or not, but how we feel about this, might be irrelevant.