It was Google who set the price and service limit, not him, so I don’t think there’s any room here to argue that the price he was paying was unfairly low.

Wait, so its his fault that he did not pay Google more? "Just in case" money?

He probably wouldn’t have been able to even if he wanted (barring using multiple accounts, which comes with its own problems, including an increased risk of Google taking it as a reason to shut the accounts down).

Can you explain, why this is subjective/meaningless? Apparently he paid the amount that Google wanted for the unlimited service?