A fictional service offers a core plan only as a bundle with premium support and data migration, while implying those extras can be removed later although no controls exist.
Bundled optionsBusiness software pricingPricing
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.
Business software pricingPricing
Support and migration locked into one plan
A fictional service offers a core plan only as a bundle with premium support and data migration, while implying those extras can be removed later although no controls exist.
Potentially problematicComplete launch bundle
Complete launch bundle. Core access, support and migration appear as one unavoidable selection.. Displayed amount: €480: €480/month. Core plan €260/month
Core access, support and migration appear as one unavoidable selection.
Displayed amount€480€480/month
Core plan €260/month
→
Neutral alternativeBuild your plan
Build your plan. Core access and genuinely optional services are priced separately.. Displayed amount: €260: Core plan €260/month. €480/month. Price, period and commitment, expanded: The price and material terms associated with “Core plan €260/month” remain beside this choice.
Core access and genuinely optional services are priced separately.
Displayed amount€260Core plan €260/month
€480/month
Price, period and commitmentThe price and material terms associated with “Core plan €260/month” remain beside this choice.
Why the first version can mislead: The presentation changes what the user can notice or predict at the pricing decision. The problematic state shows: “Core access, support and migration appear as one unavoidable selection.” Its influence should be tested by comparing the consequence and usability of “€480/month” with “Core plan €260/month”. A buyer may pay for unwanted services or misunderstand which components are optional.
What a fairer design does: Show the core service and separable extras with individual prices and controls, or explain why a bundle cannot be split.
Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
Core plan €260/monthIn “Support and migration locked into one plan”, this element shows how bundled options can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
Price, period and commitment, expanded: The price and material terms associated with “Core plan €260/month” remain beside this choice.In “Support and migration locked into one plan”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
Do “€480/month” and “Core plan €260/month” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
Place the compared prices, billing periods and material terms on one evidence sheet; where does it support “Component choices or prices are absent, hidden or materially harder”?
What neutral rendering or comprehension result would falsify the classification, particularly in light of “transparent bundle with equally accessible component options and prices”?
Side-by-side business software pricing interface showing “Complete launch bundle” and the clearer alternative “Build your plan”.Provenance: Original hypothetical business software pricing example created for this library; no real business, product or interface is depicted.
Complete pattern context
How this example relates to Bundled options
Distinct products, services, permissions or purposes are grouped under one choice so the user cannot readily understand or select them separately. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, harms, fair design principles, evidence questions and the relevant EU legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.
A fictional ticket seller offers a concert ticket only through a control that also adds a city travel pass, although the travel component is separately deliverable and not required for entry.
A fictional provider presents twenty-seven plans with inconsistent feature names, billing periods and footnote structures but offers no grouping, filters or stable comparison view.
Consent purposes fragmented into dozens of toggles
Signup consent choicesSignup
A fictional signup consent screen lists forty overlapping purposes across five nested panels, with duplicated labels and no summary of the resulting state.
Unfair Commercial Practices DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2005/29/EC; CELEX 02005L0029-20220528
Email updates
Follow new examples and material DFA developments.
Get an email when this library adds a substantial example or a verified source changes the regulatory picture.
