Accessibility statement

**We do not declare this site compliant.** Declaring conformance with WCAG 2.1 AA requires every criterion to have been tested, including with the assistive technology people actually use. That is not yet the case.

Two checks are in place, and they do not overlap. The first is **automated**: ten representative pages, in both themes and at two widths — forty scans. It reports no violations.

The second, carried out on 12 September 2026, walks eleven pages **by keyboard** and measures them under the conditions the standard requires us to support: a 320-pixel-wide window, and text spacing increased by the reader. It checks the skip link, tab order against reading order, focus visibility, the absence of keyboard traps, field labelling and each page title.

That second check found two defects the first could not see, both fixed the same day: a button overflowing the screen by 128 pixels on every case study, and a newsletter field with no accessible name wherever two forms appeared on one page.

What is still missing is named below, and it is the essential part: nobody has listened to this site. A tool measures distances and contrast; it does not hear. Claiming conformance before that step would be false, and would turn against us the day someone found otherwise.

The automated check is part of the delivery pipeline: it runs before every release, and a regression blocks deployment exactly as a failing test does.

It covers text contrast in both themes, accessible names for links, buttons and fields, heading structure, ARIA roles and their naming, keyboard access to scrollable regions, and the presence of alternative text on images.

Since 12 September 2026 a second pass runs alongside it, this time by keyboard: skip link, tab order, focus visibility, absence of traps, field labels, and how the page holds at 320 pixels and under increased text spacing.

Fixes already made as a result: the logo's accessible name in dark theme, turquoise contrast on tinted backgrounds, naming of the quote form's progress bar, keyboard access to the availability chart, wrapping of buttons whose label grows, and a unique id for the newsletter field.

No testing has been carried out with an actual screen reader (NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver), nor with the people concerned. That is the main limit of this statement, and no tool lifts it.

Focus handling when dialogs open and close, and the relevance of alternative texts on article illustrations, have not been manually reviewed. Tab order, by contrast, is now verified on every release.

PDF documents you may receive in your client area are not checked: their accessibility depends on the tool that produced them.

If a page resists you, write to us: we treat such reports as defects, not suggestions.

Where possible, describe the page and how you navigate — keyboard, screen reader, magnification. It saves us from looking in the wrong place.

We undertake to acknowledge receipt within two working days and to give a target date for a fix.