Answered once, in one place

No. It is a technical readiness assessment — a measured, reproducible view of where your app stands against WCAG 2.2 and EN 301 549. It is not legal advice, and we never claim certification.

How the assessment is produced

Those are excellent for a web DOM. They cannot install and drive your iOS app, turn on VoiceOver, or record a checkout that traps a screen-reader user. Closing that gap is what this product is built around. What ships today is the deterministic layer — twelve active rules measured against the accessibility tree your build exposes — and the report names the layer behind every row, so you always know which one you are reading.

The honest comparison table

iOS today, and only iOS. A web add-on is planned for v2 — the same task-driven approach, not a static scanner. Android is not scheduled, and we would rather leave it off the page than list it as coming.

$149.99 for one audit, once. No subscription, and no account: you buy the credit inside the Mac app through the Mac App Store, and the app on that Mac holds it. There is nothing to sign up for and no password to lose.

What a credit buys

A credit is not a refund instrument, and a failed run does not put it back in your balance. What it buys instead is another go: if the build cannot be opened you attach a fixed one to the same audit, up to twice within 72 hours, and on delay you get a bonus credit — so you are covered without a chargeback.

Refund and credit policy

One app on one platform. Re-auditing after a fix is a separate credit.

Not yet. The app ships selling one thing — the audit credit. CI Monthly and Agency are planned, and we would rather list them as planned than take a subscription for a cadence we cannot yet guarantee.

Yes. Purchases run through the Mac App Store, so Apple handles invoicing and EU VAT as the merchant of record.

Terms of sale

One artifact: your app built for the iOS Simulator and zipped — what xcodebuild -sdk iphonesimulator produces, not an .ipa. The app shows you the command and refuses the wrong file type in front of you, not two days later. If you would rather run one thing than assemble two, our packaging script is public on GitHub as readyaudit-package: about a hundred lines of bash, MIT, no network calls, meant to be read before it is run.

No. A simulator build and nothing else — no repository access, no signing certificate, no TestFlight seat. The honest limit of that: we can name the screen and the element that failed and show you the measurement, but we cannot point at the line in your code. In practice that is a few seconds of your developer’s time, and it is the reason we never have to be trusted with a repository.

What we hold and for how long

You attach a fixed one to the same audit — up to twice, within 72 hours, at no further cost. Being straight about the other half: the credit is spent when we accept the build, and a failed run does not return it, so what we give you is the attempts rather than a refund we have no mechanism to make. Failures on our side are re-run automatically and do not use up those attempts.

Refund and credit policy

You can hand over demo credentials with the audit. They go to the run in a file it reads and deletes, never through a log, and they are destroyed with the build and the recordings when the run ends — at the outside 72 hours. If you would rather not, nothing breaks: the screens behind the login are published as not testable, with the reason written out, and never as a pass.

How credentials are handled

The target is 48 hours from the moment we accept your build. If we miss it, a bonus credit lands in your balance automatically — you do not have to ask for it and you do not have to prove anything. The only time that stops the clock is time we spend waiting on you, such as a failed build you have not re-attached yet.

What happens when we are late

They are two numbers, printed side by side, and they are never combined into one. The score says how bad what we found is: every finding subtracts from the maximum by severity, critical costing most and minor least. Coverage says how much of the checklist we could actually run. A high score on low coverage is not a good result — it is a small measurement, and the report says so rather than flattering you. Below 60% coverage the score is not printed as a number anywhere at all.

Both numbers, on a real report

Because some checks could not be run, and we publish that instead of quietly dropping them. Every check lands on one of four verdicts: pass, fail, not applicable, not testable. Only "not testable" lowers coverage — a check that does not apply to your app is not a hole in the measurement, and treating it as one would punish you for what you did not build. Every non-pass row carries a written reason, and where we know it, what would unlock the check next time.

The four verdicts in full

Anyone holding the link, on purpose. The report URL is the credential — the id in it is 122 random bits, there is no account to sign into and no endpoint that lists audits. That is what lets you forward a report to a developer, a client or a colleague without us issuing anybody anything. The other half of the deal: treat the link like a password, because it is one.

Why the link is the key

Write to us with the finding id. Every finding carries the measurement that produced it, so a disagreement is almost never about what was observed — it is about whether the rule reads it correctly, which is a conversation worth having and one we publish the outcome of in the rule catalog. We will fix a rule that is wrong. We will not delete a finding because it is inconvenient.

Get in touch

Four questions on the exemption checker — sector, EU sales, headcount, turnover. Article 2(2) is a closed list of services rather than a catch-all, and micro-enterprises providing services are exempt outright, so "the Act does not reach you" is a real answer and one the page gives. An audit is still worth buying on quality grounds; it is not worth buying on a rule you are not subject to.

Am I exempt?

They run on isolated simulators and are deleted the moment the audit completes — the report stamps the exact UTC time. The visual evidence is embedded in the report itself, and we keep no copy of it. What we do keep is the measurement: the finding rows, the score and the coverage. That is what lets a later audit tell you which findings you fixed, and it is linked to your audit, so it is pseudonymous rather than anonymous. Only the benchmark projection is de-identified, and you can have either the benchmark inclusion or the whole record dropped by asking.

Privacy policy