Audit of what exists
Automated tests plus manual review with keyboard and screen reader. The result is a prioritised defect list with the effort per item.
How you can measure us
- 01Client projects delivered to EN 301 549, such as pkw-koeln.de
- 02This website meets WCAG 2.2 AA: tested, not claimed
- 03Accessibility is part of the quote, not a surcharge at the end
- 04Documentation that lets you answer a regulator's questions
In detail
Design that holds up
A colour system with verified contrast values, readable typography, a visible focus indicator, controls with an adequate target size.
Technical implementation
Semantic markup, a sensible heading structure, ARIA only where needed, forms with associated labels and clear error messages.
Statement and evidence
An accessibility statement, a feedback mechanism and documentation you can answer follow-up questions with.
Where we are
Why it usually fails in the design, not the code
The most common defects are created long before anyone writes code: contrast that is too weak, controls reachable only with a mouse, form fields without an associated label, images without a meaningful alternative text. Split design from engineering and you find out at test time and then you have to reopen the visual identity. We do both in house, so the decision happens where it belongs: in the draft.
2020
founded
3
people
35+
websites live
★
NeuroWeb Award
Relevant cases
All work
Frequently asked questions
Accessibility
Does the European Accessibility Act apply to my company?
Since 28 June 2025 it covers many consumer-facing products and services, among them online shops, booking systems and banking services. Microenterprises providing services are exempt. Whether it applies to you is something we clarify in the first conversation. Binding legal advice comes only from a law firm.
What is the difference between the public and the private rules?
The Web Accessibility Directive binds public bodies; the European Accessibility Act addresses the private sector in consumer business. Technically both lead to the same place: the harmonised standard EN 301 549, which references WCAG at level AA.
Will it make the site ugly?
No. The most common requirements are simply good design: sufficient contrast, readable sizes, clear structure, a visible focus. This website is the proof: it meets WCAG 2.2 AA and does not look like a government form.
Is an overlay tool enough?
No. These widgets promise conformance by script and do not deliver it. Several vendors have been sued over exactly that in the US. They hide defects instead of fixing them. We don't use them.
Do you audit sites you didn't build?
Yes. That is the more common case. The audit is part of the website review and works regardless of who originally built the site.
Are you a certified conformance body?
No, and we don't claim to be. We implement the requirements and test against the same criteria. Where a formal attestation is needed, in public procurement for instance, we work with an accredited testing body.
Does that sound like
your project?
A first conversation takes half an hour and costs nothing. If you would rather have the existing site checked first, the website audit is the smaller way in.