Accessibility statement

We are working to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2, level AA, published by the W3C in October 2023. That is the standard referenced by the European Accessibility Act, by the UK public sector regulations, and by most United States settlements under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

We claim partial conformance, not full conformance, and the clause below headed “where we fall short” is the reason. A page that claims more than it can show is worse than one that names its own gaps.

• Real structure. One h1 per page, headings in order without skipping a level, and sections tied to their headings with aria-labelledby so a screen reader can list the page and jump.
• A skip link. The first thing the keyboard reaches on every page moves focus past the navigation to the main content.
• Keyboard operation throughout. Nothing needs a mouse. There is no keyboard trap, and focus order follows the reading order because the markup is in the reading order.
• A visible focus ring. The same ring everywhere on the site — a two-pixel outline with a three-pixel offset — and it is never removed. That satisfies 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured and 2.4.13 Focus Appearance, both new in 2.2.
• Reduced motion honoured. If your system asks for less motion, every animation and transition on this site is cut to effectively nothing, and smooth scrolling is switched off. Nothing important is only communicated by movement.
• Contrast. Body text runs dark ink on warm paper at well above the 4.5:1 minimum, and the dark chapters are checked at the same ratio. No information is carried by colour alone.
• Text that resizes. Type and spacing are set in relative units, so zooming to 200 per cent reflows rather than clips, and 1.4.12 Text Spacing overrides do not break the layout.
• Images described. Every photograph carries alternative text written by a person. Decorative marks are hidden from assistive technology rather than described badly.
• Chinese characters glossed. Every character on the site is followed by pinyin and an English gloss, and is marked with its own language attribute so a screen reader does not read it in English.
• No time limit, anywhere. The intake does not expire while you are filling it in, and nothing on the site moves, blinks or auto-advances.

The thirty questions are the part of this site where accessibility actually matters, because it is the part you have to complete in order to buy anything.

• Every field has a visible label, not a placeholder standing in for one, and labels stay visible while you type.
• Errors are described in words next to the field, announced to assistive technology, and never signalled by a red border alone.
• Nothing you have entered is discarded when a page reloads, which is what 3.3.7 Redundant Entry asks for.
• There is no CAPTCHA and no cognitive puzzle, in line with 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication.
• Every control that must be pointed at is at least 24 by 24 pixels, or has that much clear space around it.
• If the photograph step defeats you, email the picture instead. The address is on the intake and in the confirmation.

These are the things we know about. They are listed because you deserve to know before you spend twenty minutes discovering them.

• The Five Phases diagram is an interactive graphic. It has a text equivalent underneath, but the graphic itself is not fully operable by keyboard and does not announce state changes. The text version carries the whole meaning.
• The tongue photograph step depends on your device’s own camera or file picker, which we do not control. Some combinations of screen reader and mobile browser handle it poorly.
• The report is a PDF. It is tagged, has real headings and reads in order, but it has not been audited against PDF/UA. If you would prefer plain text, HTML, large print or a Word file, ask when you buy and we will send that format instead, at no extra cost.
• Wide tables scroll sideways on a narrow screen. The scrolling region is reachable by keyboard, but the pattern is awkward at high zoom.
• No independent audit. Everything above is our own testing, not a third party’s. We have not paid for an external evaluation, and we will say so until we have.

Automated checks run against every page whenever the site is built: axe-core for rule violations, and a contrast check across the palette. Automated tools find perhaps a third of real problems, so they are the floor, not the work.

By hand, before anything is published: the whole site walked with a keyboard alone; the intake completed with VoiceOver on macOS and with NVDA on Windows; every page viewed at 200 and 400 per cent zoom; and the site read with system-level reduced motion switched on.

This page is reviewed whenever a page is added, and at least twice a year regardless.

Write to hello@bencaohouse.com with “accessibility” in the subject. Tell us the page, what you were trying to do, and what happened. Your browser and assistive technology help, but do not hold the message back if you do not know them.

• We reply within 2 working days.
• We say what we will do, and by when, within 10 working days.
• Anything that blocks a purchase or a report is fixed first, ahead of whatever else is being built.

If something on this site stops you buying a report, tell us and we will take the thirty questions by email or on a call, and write the report from that. Nobody is going to be turned away because of a form.

If our answer is unsatisfactory, say so plainly and it goes to the same person who handles complaints in the practitioner disclosure. We would rather hear it from you than not hear it.