AppBespoke · Glasgow, working US afternoons
Website accessibility audit and the fixes, not just a report
We test your site by keyboard and screen reader, fix what's broken in your own code, and re-test. $1,950, done in 2 weeks. No overlay widget.
- WCAG 2.2 AA
- Keyboard + NVDA tested
- Fixes included
- Re-test included
$1,950 fixed · 2 weeks · monitoring from $199 a month
Get started
Send your URL. Back comes the scope and a start date by the end of the next US business day, with the price already on this page. No call needed.
Get startedNo overlay widget.Why that matters, in one tableThe numbers, once, then the actual work
Plaintiffs filed 3,117 website accessibility lawsuits in US federal court in 2025, up 27% on the 2,452 filed in 2024. Around 70% of them were against ecommerce, and 64% of the companies sued reported under $25m of revenue. That is the whole of the scare story, and those are the real numbers rather than a vendor's.
What it does not mean is that buying anything makes you safe. Nobody can sell you that. What a site can be is actually usable by somebody on a keyboard or a screen reader, which is the thing the complaints are about in the first place.
Ecommerce brands on Shopify, WooCommerce or Webflow
A theme, a dozen apps, and a checkout nobody has ever driven with a keyboard. The fixes land in your own theme and templates rather than in a script layered over them, so they survive the next app you install and they are yours to keep.
Someone who just got a demand letter or a complaint
Days rather than months, and what is wanted is evidence. You get a prioritised report naming each issue against its WCAG reference, the fixes made in the code, and a re-test showing what changed. Send your URL and the scope comes back the next business day.
Agencies and marketing leads buying for a client
A procurement form asked, or the client did. The deliverable is the thing you hand over: the report, the fixes, a before and after summary, and a draft accessibility statement. A VPAT is an add-on when their form specifically asks for one.
This page isn’t legal advice, and nothing here makes anyone “ADA compliant”. Compliance is a determination about an organisation rather than a property of a website, and what your organisation is obliged to do is a question for your counsel.
What you get for $1,950
Four things, and the second one is the difference between this and an audit. Nothing on the list is an add-on.
A prioritised issue report
Every issue found, ordered by what actually blocks somebody, each one with a screenshot, the WCAG 2.2 success criterion it fails, and what has to change. Written so a developer can act on it and a non-developer can follow it.
The fixes, in your code
The fixes made in your own code: theme, CSS, JavaScript, templates. Everything in the report is fixed within 3 days of work included in the price. Anything larger is named in the report with a quote, never billed by surprise.
A re-test and a before/after summary
The whole test run again after the fixes, and a before and after summary saying what was failing, what now passes, and what is deliberately still open. That summary is what you send to whoever asked.
A draft accessibility statement
A draft accessibility statement for your site: what was tested, when, against what, and how somebody reports a problem. Yours to publish, edit or ignore. It is a statement of fact, not a certificate.
Up to 12 page types, named
A template is audited once and the fixes apply everywhere it renders, so a thousand products are one page type rather than a thousand pages. These are the 12 covered at the fixed price.
More templates than this, or several sites, are quoted before any work starts. Never billed by surprise.
- Home
- Collection or category
- Product or detail
- Cart
- Checkout entry
- Account
- Search
- Blog index
- Blog post
- Contact
- Forms
- One custom template
How the site actually gets tested
Automated tools find roughly a third of what is wrong with a site. The other two thirds are judgements about whether a person can finish what they came to do, and those need a person.
- 01automated
Automated scan
axe-core and Lighthouse across every template in scope. This is the part a tool does well, it runs first, and it is where roughly a third of the issues turn up.
- 02manual
Full keyboard-only pass
Every template driven start to finish on the keyboard alone. Tab, shift-tab, enter, escape, arrow keys. Menus, modals, carousels and cart drawers are where this usually breaks, and no scanner finds a keyboard trap.
- 03manual
NVDA screen-reader pass
A person listening to each template with NVDA: what is announced, in what order, and whether anything is silent or read twice. Buttons that are really divs, images with no name, and live regions nobody announces all show up here.
- 04manual
Zoom to 200% and reflow
The page at 200% zoom and at 320 CSS pixels wide, checking nothing is cut off, overlapped or scrolled in two directions at once. Sticky headers and cookie bars are the usual casualties.
- 05manual
Contrast, measured
Text and interface contrast measured with the ratio reported back, not eyeballed. Where a brand colour fails, it is flagged with the nearest passing value rather than changed quietly, because your palette is your decision.
- 06manual
Focus order and form errors
The order focus actually moves in, whether the focus ring is visible on every control, and whether form errors are tied to their fields and announced rather than just turning something red.
The part a scanner cannot do
A scanner reads the markup. It cannot tell you that focus disappears into a cart drawer and never comes back, because that is a thing that happens to a person rather than a thing that is wrong with a line of HTML.
Every template in scope is driven this way, then listened to with NVDA, before a single fix is written.
Overlays, scanners, agencies, and this
You are comparing four options, so here they are with the honest argument for and against each. One of them is genuinely the same work as this, and it is not the cheap one.
| Option | What it costs | The honest argument |
|---|---|---|
| An overlay widget | $49-200 a month, forever | An overlay sits on top of your code and leaves the code as it was. Screen-reader users and testers hit the same problems underneath it. In April 2025 the FTC finalised a $1m order against accessiBe over claims its widget made sites WCAG compliant.FTC final order, April 2025 |
| Automated SaaS remediation | About $599 a month, or $7,188 a year | Scanners are genuinely good at what they catch, which is roughly a third of the issues. Keyboard traps, focus order, reading order and form error handling are judgements about whether a person can finish a task, and no scanner makes them. |
| An accessibility agency | $3,000 to $10,000 and up | Often the same standard and the same manual testing, which is why this is the honest comparison of the four. What is different here is the scope and the price are published, it is one site, and it is done in two weeks. |
| Doing nothing | Nothing, until it does | A real option, and sometimes the right one. The numbers above are what the risk looks like. The other half of it is that people who use a keyboard or a screen reader currently cannot buy from you, and that part does not need a lawsuit to be costing something. |
| This page | $1,950 once, then optional monitoring | The same manual testing an agency does, scoped to one site and published at a fixed price, with the fixes made in your code and a re-test. It is not a certificate and it is not protection from being sued, because neither of those is a thing anyone can sell you. |
What the report looks like
Every entry carries the same four things: how badly it blocks somebody, the success criterion it fails, what was found in plain English, and what was changed in the code. Here are three of the kind that turn up on almost every site.
Focus is invisible in the cart drawer
- What was found
- Tabbing into the cart drawer moves focus, but nothing changes on screen, so a keyboard user has no idea where they are.
- What was changed
- Focus ring restored on every interactive element in the drawer, in the theme stylesheet rather than reset away globally.
Product links announce as "link"
- What was found
- Product tiles announce as "link" and nothing else, because the image carries no alt text and there is no other text in the link.
- What was changed
- Product images take their alt from the product title; the decorative badges are marked as decorative so they are not read out at all.
Checkout errors are colour only
- What was found
- A failed checkout field turns red and adds a message below it, but the message is not tied to the field, so a screen reader never reads it.
- What was changed
- Each message tied to its field with aria-describedby, the field marked invalid, and focus moved to the first error on submit.
These are examples of the format rather than a real client’s report. The one you get is your site, your templates, and a screenshot against each entry.
Get startedPricing, published
One fixed price for the audit and the fixes. Two optional extras, and the list of what would change the number.
$1,950
fixed, 2 weeks from access being granted
- Up to 12 page types, audited against WCAG 2.2 AA
- Automated scan, plus keyboard and NVDA passes by a person
- Fixes in your own code, up to 3 days of work
- Re-test, before and after summary, draft accessibility statement
$450
one-off, when somebody’s procurement asks for one
An Accessibility Conformance Report, written against the audit, in the format a customer’s procurement team is asking you to fill in. The going rate elsewhere is $350 to $950.
It is a statement of what was tested and what conformed. Like everything else here it is not a certificate, and nobody issues those.
Monitoring
Optional$199
a month
Because the usual way a fixed site breaks again is a theme update
- A re-scan every month, and after any theme or app change you flag.
- Regression fixes up to 1 hour a month, included.
- The date on your accessibility statement kept current.
- Cancel any time, in one email. No notice period and no minimum.
What is not in the $1,950
Anything here is quoted before it is done. A fixed price is only worth anything if the page has already told you what would change it, so this is the list.
Invoiced in USD, half to start and half on delivery, card or bank transfer.
- More than 12 page types, or a second site. Quoted first, never assumed.
- Work beyond the 3 included days. Named in the report with a price, and your call.
- A rebuild. If a component has to be replaced rather than fixed, the report says so.
- Documents, native apps, and anything still in design rather than built.
If a fix breaks something, it is corrected free
Anything in the report that is not fixed within the included 3 days is named explicitly, with a quote, rather than quietly left out. And if a change made here breaks something on your site, that is corrected at no charge. Those are promises about the work, which is the only kind of promise a vendor can honestly make here: whether your organisation is compliant is a determination about you, and nobody selling you an audit gets to decide it.
How it works
01
Send your URL
The form takes a URL, your platform and roughly how many page types you have. No call, no discovery session, nothing to install. If the site is behind a login or on staging, say so and send credentials separately.
02
Scope confirmed in 1 business day
Back within one business day: which templates are in scope, what the price is, and the start date. If your site is larger than 12 page types, that is quoted here rather than discovered halfway through.
03
Audit and fixes in two weeks
The audit and the fixes, 2 weeks from access being granted. What is needed from you is a staging site or theme access, or a developer on your side named as the person to hand patches to.
04
Re-test, report and statement
Everything tested again, and back comes the report, the before and after summary and the draft accessibility statement. If a fix broke something on the site, that is corrected at no charge.
What is needed from your side
Access is the one thing that delays this work, so it is worth sorting before the start date rather than on day three. Nothing here has to be ready to send the form.
- A staging site, or theme and template access on the live one
- Or a developer on your side named as the person patches go to
- Logins for anything behind a sign-in that is in scope
Who this is for, and who it isn’t
A good fit
- Shopify, WooCommerce and WordPress, Webflow, Squarespace
- Custom React and Next.js front ends
- A site that is built and live, or on staging and close to it
- One site at a time, up to 12 distinct page types
Not this
- A site still in design. Fix it in the design and it costs a fraction of this
- Legal advice, or an opinion on what you are obliged to do
- A certificate, a badge, or a guarantee against being sued
- Native iOS and Android apps, which are different work
Documents are the common one. If what you actually have is a pile of untagged PDFs, that is priced per page on the PDF remediation page rather than here.
The questions that decide this one
Is this legal advice?
No. Nothing on this page is legal advice, and an audit is not a legal opinion. What your organisation is obliged to do, and by when, is a question for your counsel. What is offered here is the testing and the engineering work, plus a report you can hand to whoever is asking.
Will this stop a lawsuit?
No, and nobody can honestly promise that. Anyone can file a complaint about any site at any time. What this does is remove the barriers a tester or a screen-reader user would actually hit, and leave you with dated evidence of what was tested, what was fixed and what is still open. That is a real thing to have and it is not immunity.
Do you use an overlay?
No. An overlay is a script that sits on top of your code and leaves the code exactly as it was, so the problems are still there underneath for anyone using a screen reader. The FTC finalised a $1m order against one overlay vendor in April 2025 over its compliance claims. The fixes here go into your own theme, templates and CSS.
What if we already have a widget?
That is fine and it changes nothing about the work. The code underneath gets fixed either way. Whether you then keep paying for the widget is your call, and it is worth knowing that the underlying issues are what a tester looks at, not what the widget claims.
Who does the work?
One engineer, in Glasgow, working US afternoons. Not an offshore team and not a queue: the person who runs the keyboard pass is the person who writes the fixes and replies to your email.
Do you have an accessibility certification?
No, and you should be wary of vendors implying otherwise, because there is no licence to practise here. What there is: WCAG 2.2 AA as the written standard, axe-core and Lighthouse for the automated pass, and manual keyboard and NVDA testing done by a person. The report names the success criterion for every issue, so the work can be checked against the standard rather than taken on trust.
What about our PDFs?
Documents are separate work, priced per page rather than as part of this, and a site audit here does not cover them. If the PDFs are the real problem, there is a page for exactly that.
Can you re-test after we change the theme?
Yes, that is what the monitoring is for: $199 a month for a re-scan after theme or app changes, regression fixes up to 1 hour, and an updated date on the statement. Cancel any time. A theme update is the usual way a fixed site quietly breaks again.
A scope and a start date within 1 business day
$1,950 for the audit and the fixes, done in 2 weeks from access being granted. Tell me the URL and what put this on your desk, and the scope comes back written down.
No call, no discovery session, and no demo. The price is already on this page.