A connected bank feed can reduce manual processing, but it should not be mistaken for proof that every expected transaction has arrived. A break in connection, delayed data or a change in account access can leave a period incomplete while the bookkeeping system continues to display the transactions it did receive.
A bank-feed gap review establishes the missing boundary and compares the imported record with appropriate bank evidence before routine reconciliation proceeds.
Define the suspected missing period
Identify the bank account and the dates or sequence where the feed appears incomplete. Avoid describing the issue simply as transactions missing when the exact boundary can be established.
A defined gap makes later comparison and resolution much easier.
Check whether the issue is a feed gap or a filter problem
Before assuming data failed to arrive, confirm that the bookkeeping view is not hiding transactions because of date ranges, status filters or another ordinary display setting.
This prevents unnecessary re-import activity where the records are already present.
Compare against appropriate bank evidence
Use the firm's approved source for bank records to establish what activity actually occurred during the suspected gap. Compare dates, amounts and transaction sequence with what reached the bookkeeping system.
The independent bank evidence defines completeness more reliably than the feed alone.
Protect against duplicate recovery
If missing transactions need to be imported or entered through an authorised process, check the overlap boundaries carefully. Some transactions immediately before or after the gap may already exist.
Do not recover an entire period blindly if only part of it is missing.
Keep unresolved feed items separate from bookkeeping judgement
A technical data gap does not explain how every recovered transaction should be treated. Once missing records are available, process uncertain items through the normal bookkeeping query and evidence workflow.
Restoring data and classifying transactions are related but separate tasks.
Reconcile the repaired period
After the missing activity has been recovered through the appropriate process, reconcile the affected bank period again. Check that expected opening and closing positions and transaction activity now align with the available bank evidence.
Any remaining difference should stay visible as a separate reconciliation exception.
Record the gap and recovery outcome
Keep a concise note of the affected period, how completeness was checked and whether any follow-up remains. If the feed continues to fail, route the technical issue through the organisation's appropriate support process.
A bank-feed gap review prevents convenience from becoming false confidence. It lets bookkeepers use automated transaction delivery while retaining an evidence-based check that the working record is actually complete.