You have no responses, mirkoni, so I'll chip in. I have changed my point of view on this. Having now received quite a bit of feedback on the new syllabus exams I think they actually are fit for purpose, at least the EASA ones which have been corrected and updated over the last year, I'm not sure about the UK CAA versions which have not. There are questions asked that are outside the syllabus but not many, less than 10% probably and 'outside the syllabus' is a matter of degree in most cases. 'Just outside the syllabus' may be a matter of interpretation and acceptable (well not to a pedant), obviously 'wildly outside the syllabus' is not.
I now have the view that the disastrous early results were mostly the fault of the ATOs who did not properly assess how the exams were likely to change, and therefore didn't teach their classes properly. Of course they aren't going to admit this and they are busy blaming everybody else, so it must remain just an old man's opinion. Combined with this some clearly haven't updated their training material either at all, or at least properly. One hears reports of students who just haven't heard at all about quite basic concepts. On the other hand some ATOs such as FTE Jerez clearly have prepared properly and have seen a reduction in percentage scores but NOT a significant reduction in pass rates, yet other ATOs have near 100% fails.
As far as question banks go, yes, we are coming on. There's a lot of information out there if you cast our net widely. May I recommend the discord server...link available from the facebook group ATPL theory students EASA 2020.